| Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Proactive or reactive government? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 10 2014, 11:38 AM (58 Views) | |
| Cymru | Nov 10 2014, 11:38 AM Post #1 |
|
Alt-Right
  ![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
Proactive governments actively seek to intervene on issues before they become problems for them to solve. Reactive governments give people the freedom to decide themselves but will intervene after the fact if any problems occur needing their intervention. Which of the two do you prefer? |
 |
 
|
| Alberich | Nov 11 2014, 12:07 PM Post #2 |
Alberich
|
It can never be an "either/or". All governments are both pro-active at times, and are forced into being reactionary by events. In an ideal world, having the ability to identify and remedy all future problems before they arise, would indeed be nirvana. But we live in the real world. |
|
|
|
| Affa | Nov 11 2014, 01:29 PM Post #3 |
|
Senior Member
|
Thatcher was pro-active, Blair was pro-active ........ it is the mark of Statesmanship. |
|
|
|
| johnofgwent | Nov 11 2014, 01:34 PM Post #4 |
It .. It is GREEN !!
|
I want one that bloody well leaves me alone to make my living my way without filling the street with people clamouring they'll do what I do for a sack of lentils a week. Edited by johnofgwent, Nov 11 2014, 01:34 PM.
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
12:37 AM Jul 14