CRJU 20423 Chapter Notes - Chapter 7: Simple Explanation, Social Constructionism, Mcdonaldization

15 views3 pages

tandonkey408

17 May 2017

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Textbook Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

When crime waves by sacco chapter 7: crime waves and public policy. Introduction: we can think of crime policy as whatever it is that governmental organizations do (or do not do) with respect to crime. We"re going to war: a common political and policy response to the problem of crime is the declaration of war. Cost-effectiveness: in general, those responsible for the development of public policy would like to solve the problem in the cheapest possible way. A consequence of this is that those resources that do exist in the system often need to be redeployed in order to accommodate the new policy. Vii: problem solutions have greater appeal when they can show results in the near term, any current administration will look to the potential political gains or losses a particular policy might hold. Clear logic: the marketability of a crime policy depends to some degree on the clarity of its logic.

Related Questions

Scenario

Staff Nurse: Thank you for agreeing to talk to me about the discussion we had the other day about assigning patient load. As I started to say in the meeting, but got interrupted, is that I really donât like the new plan that we have. I liked the old one better. I donât understand why we need to change.

Leader: You did get to express one concern about visiting patients in Iron Ridge and that is the communityâs high crime rate. We all recognize this issue, and I do understand. But the new patient assignment scheme is meant to match you with patients who will most benefit from your specialty, and not where you live geographically. There are many patients in Iron Ridge who have diabetes that need your expertise.

Staff Nurse: Wellâ¦ I really do love my patients and I donât hold it against them that they live in a bad part of town. But frankly, Iâm afraid! Every night when I watch the news, there is somebody thatâs been involved in a shooting or a carjacking. I talked to my husband about it and he said that if you insist I go over there, he wants me to quit. Itâs not safe!

Leader: [audible pause] I have an idea I would like to explore with you. What if we sent an escort to accompany you on your visits? Would this help you feel safer in that neighborhood?

Staff nurse: Sure, it would, but do you think thatâs realistic? The last I heard, we didnât have any money to give us nurses raises and bonuses. I mean, do we even have the budget for something like security?

Leader: Itâs realistic as long as I can justify the safety of our nurses. Letâs say the cost is not a barrier to this scheme. What do you think? Staff Nurse: [hesitation] Please let me think about it. I need to talk to my husband, too. I canât decide right now, but youâve given me something to consider.

At times the needs of our families conflict with our work responsibilities. Could this possibly be the underlying issue here?

1)Explain the conflict resolution skills displayed by the leader in the scenario. On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate those of the leader.

2)How might earlier collaboration have been beneficial?

3)Some organizations utilize non Registered Nurses in the Case Manager role. What additional skills, knowledge and attributes would the BSN-prepared Registered Nurse bring to case management in this scenario?

Question is this -How government intervenes in the economy from three perspectives: Fiscal, Monetary, and Supply Side efforts. You have also now looked at the criticisms of government involvement from the Classical perspective. Which approach makes the most sense to you?

Comment on this answer...

This is Answer-After learning about the classical economic viewpoint and the criticisms of government from it, I don't think there is one single approach that makes the most sense to me between fiscal, monetary, and supply-side policies. I think a minimal mix of the three is okay, and for each, they have their own given situations where they may work best in comparison to the others, or even work in conjunction with one another.

Increasing aggregate demand through fiscal policy may help the economy with unemployment and price levels, or it may hurt the economy instead and leave it in a worse state than it was previously found to be at. This could create artificial demand where there isn't true demand from the consumers. This could trick business and mess them up.

Controlling the supply of money through monetary policy may be helpful to the economy for taming inflation and keeping price stability. Controlling it too much could cause problems such as market unpredictability, which in turn could cause mixed results such as to scare people away or draw them into borrowing less or more money.

Increasing supply through supply-side policies may help the economy with unemployment and price levels. It could hurt people in ways such as people not receiving federal funding, or receive less of it (budget cuts in whatever that may be) due to tax cuts, exemptions, etc., from the government to businesses.

With these three perspectives in mind, I would prefer to see a more classical approach to economic situations. The perspectives of fiscal, monetary, and supply-side policy I think can each be helpful but would be best if they didn't have to be implemented in the first place. They have the potential to cause damage to the economy. After watching the classical economics video and reading the chapter, one thing that stood out to me and I think summarizes government involvement from a classical economists viewpoint is the government's role is like being the umpire in a baseball game. They should make sure everyone plays by the rules and only enters the game as a last resort. That approach makes sense to me.

cerisepig520

Economists use economic models to guide their thinking in regards explaining and predicting that which is otherwise unknown. These models are generalizations that rest on assumptions we use in creating a simplified setting, where only that which is most-pertinent is allowed to come into play directly, and at the same time, that which is not pertinent is rendered excluded by being held constant. Simply put, if you change your founding assumptions, you change the model for you have changed the simplified setting. If you change a variable that is included directly into the model, you can then assume the variable changes marginally then trace out the effects of this marginal change on the variable being explained. Similarly, If you allow a change of a variable that has been excluded, you are relaxing an assumption so you can reason out what the effects of such a change could be.

What is important to understand here, is the description I have just relayed to you describes how economists use models. It is but one example of how models are used more-generally in ALL the other sciences and social sciences. And to go a step further, it is but a description or formalization of how we in an all-inclusive sense use assumptions when we are reasoning about that which we reason about. Our assumptions are our foundations for our thoughts about all that we consider in our efforts towards understanding the world in which we live and the people, both individually and collectively inclusive of their institutions, with whom we come into contact.

Using this knowledge, describe what you think are the dangers to our thinking and actions based on our thinking of our using simplifying assumptions that are wholly untrue or are too strong, too constricting, are way too over-generalizing. Choose whatever context you wish and provide an example. Then describe why having at the very least a small measure of skepticism may be considered healthy for one's own sake and the sake of others.

CRJU 20423 Chapter Notes - Chapter 7: Simple Explanation, Social Constructionism, Mcdonaldization

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

CRJU 20423 Chapter Notes - Chapter 20: Moral Panic, Junk Science, Mothers Against Drunk Driving

CRJU 20423 Lecture Notes - Lecture 7: Fair Sentencing Act, Mcdonaldization, Moral Panic

CRJU 20423 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Social Constructionism, Serial Killer

Related Questions