The following blog entries represent a look into those national practices that appear to reap the best results for their citizens.  As the U.S. government lumbers forward (note perpetually loading gif), it will have to learn from its mistakes and those of its neighbors.  Our group feels that these catagories are central to modern government's mission, and that understanding the strategies of other nations can inform our own.  Please comment.

Crime & Punishment (Justice) by Briley

One of the most paramount factors in deciding where one lives or stays is safety. Earth is an extensive place with millions of locations that vary in how safe they are. What exactly does a country do to keep people safe and reduce crime to shockingly low rates? Are the punishments harsh or are people genuinely happy? It’s surprising how stark the answer is. Knowing why a country is safe is quite clear-cut, but the difficult task is actually making the country safe.

  A not so surprising fact is that the 18-24 age group contributes the most to crime. After all they are not the wisest due to their young age but still contribute to the world (as expected) and have the capability to commit crime. New Zealand finds that the best way to keep a teenager from offending people is by having them in school. When a teen is found guilty of something detrimental to the environment, they are usually suspended or expelled from the school. When they aren’t in school they have nothing to do so they wander into the streets with bad groups of people thus starting their spiral into crime as they get older and out of high school. New Zealand has realized that and has enacted a plan to stop it by stopping it’s suspensions and expulsions of students. That and a strict criminal justice system contributes greatly to New Zealand’s safety.

  After a great deal of research, I found a striking recurring theme in the low crime rate countries.  Low percent crime countries either allowed guns and a mass majority of citizens had them, or the country was a police state with almost no freedoms. Three countries provide great examples. Iceland, Switzerland, and Singapore.

In the country of Iceland more than a 1/3 of the population owns firearms. In the USA a person buying a firearm is usually only subject to a background check. In Iceland you must pass a medical exam and a written test.

The country of Switzerland’s military has less than 5% of professional soldiers. Every man is trained 18-23 weeks when they turn 18 on how to fight. Women can voluntarily join. 20,000 people are trained annually. They are required to keep their equipment and guns at home. This means that almost the entire population of Switzerland has a gun in their home and they all know how to properly use it. Giving them close to zero crime in their country.

Crime in Singapore is virtually non existent. Looking into the law system can easily tell you why. In the country of Singapore jaywalking, the sale of chewing gum, failing to flush toilets after use and other seemingly harmless actions are deemed criminal offenses. Punishments in Singapore include public caning, $1,000 fine and forced community labor for dropping trash on the ground, and jail time for hugging someone without permission. Singapore has what is called “MDP” which stands for Mandatory Death Penalty. If you are found with certain amounts of certain drugs such as a pound of marijuana or half an ounce of heroin, you are sentenced to death. Singapore also has one of the highest execution rates in the world.

Other factors that contribute to crime is drug use, and the economic class tension. Countries that are safe usually have low drug use and little to no economic classes. When you have a high number of very poor people and a high number of very wealthy people living in the same area, the poor people are going to be upset over the difference in classes. Homogeneous people have little to fight about. Changing a society to include some of these laws and ways of life would be laborious. To make a country safe you must start slow with change, or create several rules at once and suffer from the dismayed population.

The Swiss Miracle: No Holes in This Cheese. (GDP) by Michael

The high placement of Switzerland on essentially all lists measuring the GDP (per capita) of countries is unique in that, next to its competitors in similar slots, it has no abundance of natural resources (such as Norway with its astonishing oil deposits), it is not a small tax haven (such as Luxembourg, Macau, or Liechtenstein, to name a few), and it does not have huge amounts of  land to diversify its exports, or a strong defense industry at that (such as its nearest neighbor on most GDP lists, the United States). So, what could account for Switzerland's placement in the top 10 of almost all lists of  GDP (the World Bank considers its placement at #5)? While Switzerland is known most for its fine watches and knives denoting exceptional craftsmanship, the next thing most think about concerning Switzerland is the well-known shady banking practices employed there. While craftsmanship and being a beacon for international banking would certainly denote high earnings, Switzerland's large economy is more due to its history among European nations rather than its raw talents.

            Switzerland has historically been perceived as a neutral, stable country, obviously mostly due to Swiss neutrality during the first and second World Wars. However, the largest factor during the first half of the 20th century as to Switzerland's economic prowress was actually an economic depression during the first World War. Border guards were made up of conscripted working-class men who were not compensated for lost wages, and increased currency production during this time period caused inflation; both of these factors lead to an economic downturn which was not helped by their inabilty to import/export goods due to the surrounding combat. This low period extended after the war and was made even worse by the onset of World War II. Of note, however, is that Swiss neutrality in the first conflict made them ideal candidates for business and negotiations (for example, the Geneva conventions and associated conferences) which helped their international image on the whole.

            The period of Swiss history during the Second World War was not altogether different. They experienced an economic slump at the onset of the war followed by fortification of their borders and conscription. However, their involvement in the second war was highly economic as opposed to the almost complete neutrality of the first, with Switzerland selling arms to their neighboring countries (France, Germany, and allies such as Great Britain) and dealing financially with both sides of the war. Afterwards, it was again seen as a ideal place to handle negotiations due to neutrality, and Geneva conventions continued to be held there. Unlike a majority of Europe, Switzerland's industry was largely undamaged by the war and was therefore mostly able to continue business as usual before, during, and after World Wars I and II. In short, Switzerland's conduct from the 1910s to the 1940s allowed the international financial community to see it as a safe haven, and a stable one at that, causing Switzerland to be a ready target for investment and banking concerns. However, this is only the "start" of a successful GDP, and would have to be maintained by policy and actions.

            Most notably, Switzerland has a rather unique taxation structure. Their constituion places specific limits on how their citizens might be taxed, and due to the means by which taxes are implemented being subject to direct democracy (IE, counting all votes and using them to determine the outcome) all taxes can be struck down by the population which they affect. Furthermore, it is in the Swiss constitution that all taxes must be general and equal in nature, and proportionate in the affectee's ability to pay the tax. Therefore, by constitutional nature all Swiss taxes are supposedly designed to accomodate the population as much as possible, and therefore they have one of the lowest tax revenue as a percentage of GDP rate among most first-world countries (IE, the United States, Australia, Norway, Sweden, Canada, etc.) In all, their taxation practices allow most citizens to be taxed by a fair amount according to their situation and therefore allow them to keep a majority of their income.

            Indeed, a majority of Switzerland's politics are the closest in the world to "direct democracy" in that almost all changes to law have the option to and all changes to the constitution must have a referendum, a direct vote in which the entire electorate (in Switzerland's case, the population it affects) is asked to adopt or reject the proposal. The necessary signatures needed to challenge a law is only 50,000; these must be collected in a 100-day period, and given Switzerland's population of nearly eight million, this is hardly a majority. Citizens may also seek to amend the constitution themselves, and the signatures required for this are only 100,000 in eight months. While necessary legal wording for these amendments is obviously required, and the government may make a similar counter-proposal for the amendment, this kind of political power and freedom is almost unheard of elsewhere in the world. In short, the Swiss are close to having the most enfranchised voters on the planet, and are able to make and decide on laws affecting themselves by their own decision, rather than be represented by a leader.

            The Swiss "executive branch" is comprised of a seven-member panel known as the Swiss Federal Council, comprised of citizens eligible for the position who do not necessarily need to register for the election to be elected. This combination cabinet and collective presidency decides most major decisions typical of the United States president and works in hand with the legislative branch of the Swiss government. The Federal Council is often diverse in which political parties are seated, usually having only one or two seats filled by one party; this diversification, as well as being a small council rather than a singular person or party, allows stability in government by discouraging one party moving into leadership and swearing to undo most of another party's actions. The effect of this stability on their economy and therefore GDP is largely superficial in that the Council will likely not play direct roles in the finalization of taxes and other economic laws (whose "final veto" ultimately lies in popular referendum), however the stability in government, both in reality and in appearance, creates a very appealing platform for investment and economic prosperity.

            In total, the Swiss' economic success (often toted as the "Swiss Miracle") is rooted in being neutral and friendly, and supplanted by having one of the freest and most stable governments on earth. Its strategic position is also of  no small importance: being surrounded by mountains allowed them the security to be neutral, and ensured that no invading power actually wanted to disrupt the Swiss system. Their lack of natural resources (aside from coal deposits) allows them to be even less strategic, and lets them focus economic power on specialty crafts and financial objectives. An astonishingly democratic, free, and most importantly largely successful political system gives them governmental stability and a unique amount of transparency that cannot be bad for citizens and corporations alike. Swiss neutrality, stability, and success therefore makes them a centerpoint for international affairs of all kinds, including finances and diplomacy, which makes them extremely likeable and allows foreign investment to essentially flow into the country. Furthermore, this analysis says nothing of Swiss infrastructure, which is more a product of a successful economy despite how much it also bolsters the economy.

            But are these practices and successes viable elsewhere? It's not entirely likely; most other countries have strategic resources, weak points in geography that allow hostilities to invade, and most first-world countries have populations often considered too large for a direct democracy. Furthermore, Switzerland had a very unique situation during the World Wars, and was able to keep its independence and neutrality during the second due to their economic practices. It is not always so easy to remain neutral. However, aside from their ability to effectively  be an almost "direct democracy" their government is certainly insanely successful and has no means (other than the popular referendums and amendments) which makes it unscalable to the population bulges of  first world countries. So, is it viable for other countries to emulate the Swiss? In some ways yes, in others not so much. However, to assume it impossible to emulate Switzerland would almost certainly be considered folly.

Daniele on Healthcare

In terms of healthcare there is no prefect recipe in order to create the most effective system all the while satisfying each individual’s specific needs, however some countries come relatively close in balancing each aspect that formulates an effective medical system. The common denominator outlining the success of a health care system in a country is the government’s high involvement in the provision of medical services. The countries with the highest life expectancy, lowest infant mortality rate and broadest access to medical care, tend to be countries with strong and influential government medical provisions. Also, not by coincidence, these same countries have the lowest relative medical cost per capita. Thus the criteria considered to rank health care systems generally consists of the following statistics: child mortality rate, life expectancy, healthcare cost per capita, and healthcare cost as a percentage of GDP per capita.

            Research by the World Bank and the World Health Organization on longevity ranks Japan and Switzerland first with eighty-three years, in second come Canada, Australia, France, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Singapore, Spain and Sweden with eighty-two years. In terms of infant mortality rate under the age of five, Iceland ranks the highest with only two deaths per one thousand, following by Norway, Sweden, Singapore, Finland, Japan and Slovenia with three. Obviously low mortality rates and high life expectancy, represents an efficient health care system.

            Health care spending is an essential element of any industrialized country’s economy; it meets the basic individual and social need for services that bring improved health, greater productivity, and longer lives. Countries such as Japan, Australia, Norway, UK, and Sweden are successful at providing good healthcare based on total health spending. In these countries, unlike the United States, a large share of health care is publicly funded or funded by the government through universal insurance-based or tax financed systems. Research by The Commonwealth Fund, finds the average health care spending per capita in 2011, New Zealand as the lowest with $3,182, then Japan, UK, Australia, Sweden, France, Germany, Denmark, and Canada all follow with less than $5,000. For example public spending on healthcare in Norway and the U.K is 84%, lessening the private and out of pocket spending for the people, creating a much more accommodating and desirable healthcare system. Furthermore, healthcare spending as of percentage of GDP in 2011, is significantly lower in these same countries Australia with 8.9%, Norway, UK, Sweden, Japan, succeed with less that 10% than the country with the highest spending. Ultimately more spending doesn’t necessarily equate to a better healthcare system: contrarily, a more efficient structure occurs when the government provides for the majority of healthcare services. 

Dom on Education

Singapore is consistently ranked in the top three countries with regards to education. This is a result of government policies geared towards the investment in the learning of the new generation. This is very important to the government of Singapore, especially considering the new generation will someday be the ones leading the country. Because of this there exists an establishment called the Ministry of Education, created to direct the formulation and implementation of education policies. The Ministry of Education is in charge of the development and control of Government and Government-aided primary schools, secondary schools, junior colleges, and a centralized institute.

One particular aspect of Singapore’s education system that contributes to much of its success is the fact that it has almost universal education at the primary and secondary school level. Even the very small number of people who are not enrolled in national schools cause the government to worry that they will not be productive members in what they see as a knowledge-based economy. Because of this, the Committee of Compulsory Education in Singapore was formed to decide on the future of compulsory education. The CCES decided that compulsory education should be implemented, in an effort to bring education to each and every citizen of Singapore.

In Singapore, children usually start schooling at the age of three (though sometimes younger) when they enter preschool. Preschool there consists of one year of nursery and two years of kindergarten. In preschool they learn to develop basic language and writing skills, social skills, creativity, and physical activities. In Singapore it is also important that students learn two languages, usually English and either Chinese, Malay, or Tamil, as early as possible.

After their three years of preschool, or upon reaching age six, students attend primary school. In primary school there is a two year orientation-stage followed by a four-year foundation course. While in the two-year orientation stage students learn basic math skills, get a better grasp of English, and also improve their knowledge of their first language. In the four-year foundation course, their curriculum consists of three circles: the inner circle, the middle circle, and the outer circle. The inner circle focuses on life skills and developing habits and sound values that lead to a successful and responsible adult life, such classes in this circle include “Character and Citizenship Education” and “Values in Action.” The middle circle focuses on knowledge skills and developing students’ abilities to think, process information, and communicate, as well as enabling them to express thoughts and ideas concisely. This part of the curriculum is taught through project work. The outer circle consists of general courses: math, science, languages, social studies, art, music, etc. Even with these general curriculum guidelines, different schools focus on different things such as sports, arts, or social clubs.

      After the six years of primary school, students can then go on to secondary school for four to five years of education. One of the things that is very unique about secondary school in Singapore is the price for schooling. At an Autonomous School one pays Autonomous school fees which range from five to eighteen dollars a month, which is relatively inexpensive, and at and Independent School one pays another set of fees which range from two hundred to three hundred dollars a month, still relatively inexpensive for an independent school. This goes to show that in Singapore education is much less expensive, which is a great benefit to the students. Besides prices though, secondary education also places students in either Special, Express, Normal (Academic), or Normal (Technical) courses depending on their scores on the PSLE, or Primary School Leaving Exam. These courses vary in difficulty and pacing, but they all eventually lead to General Certificate of Education (GCE) Ordinary (O) level exam.

After passing the GCE ‘O’ students then move on to two to three years of Pre-University education, with similar costs as secondary school, except it’s about one hundred dollars more for Independent schools. Pre-University education is to prepare students for the GCE Advanced (A) level exam. Once a student passes the GCE ‘A’ they can then apply to a college to further their education along their chosen career path, that path usually being worked out in Career Guidance (GD) class in Pre-University.

Overall, the education system in Singapore is very well constructed, designed to accommodate every student’s educational needs and abilities. This is due mainly to the Ministry of Education and the fact that the government places such importance on education and believes that, because humans are its most valuable resource, the more educated the populace, the stronger the nation.

Katie on Education

What is great education? Education differs all over the world; no two-education systems are the same. One country has an education system that outshines the rest. This country’s government supports education with the highest regards for students and teachers, but there are no specified “in-the-box” curricula or standards schools have to follow which allows for the best situations to learn. The esteemed award for “world’s best education” belongs to the country known as Finland.

Education in Finland cost is 100% funded by the government; no cost is put upon the parents of students. Every school receives an equal distribution of the funds for education; therefore every school is equal in resources. Private schools hardly exist due to the government funded public schools. When a student attends public school, not only does he or she receive a free meal halfway through their day, but are also given full access to free health-care from the government. Not only do parents sign their child up for an enriching education, but their child is covered medically as well. This is an incentive for parents to send their children to public school.

            A small sum of the government funding goes to teacher’s salaries, making the salaries rather small, but that does not affect the quality of education. The Finnish government has stressed the importance of teachers to a quality education. Teachers are regarded as highly as doctors and lawyers. The high regard of teachers causes an influx of highly qualified professionals. Teachers in Finland are only chosen from the top ten percent of their respective classes to assure professionalism. Such highly qualified and respected teachers give their students careful attention and adjust to their needs. To aid in this they are given a loose curriculum guide which provides a unique environment for all students and top notch teaching accentuating a teacher’s specific style

Another way the government eases the learning process for students is by a reduction of national exams and standardized tests. A lack of standardized tests results in a more time spent in the classroom learning as opposed to filling in bubble sheets in effect taking more pressure off of the students and teachers. There is no competition to be the best, and the classroom is a safe environment. Outside the classroom, co-curricular activities cease to exist as well. With a lack of competition, all the pressure and stress of being the “best” is replaced with a haven to learn that is equally enjoyable for teachers and students alike.

            Students need a quality education with tremendous teachers and no competition. The Finnish school system offers all of this. The government understands that an equal education will result in better results overall. If the students who graduate school received great education, then their input in the workforce and betterment of the country will in turn also be great. 

Lily on Green Government

In a world where natural resources are being depleted, carbon footprints are becoming larger, and the effects of global warming are becoming more evident, many countries now embrace a “green” initiative to help make their economies more environmentally friendly. Although many countries are now “greening”, few have successfully converted into green economies. Notable governments who have obtained success and continue to be innovators and lead the green movement, include Switzerland and Iceland. Both governments utilize renewable and sustainable energy, give tax incentives and penalties to citizens for being green or non-green, and create laws that help keep their countries environmentally friendly. These governments recognized the need for environmental improvement not only to enhance the efficiency of their countries, but also to help preserve the planet which sustains all of man kind.

         Switzerland and Iceland are two countries that are dedicated to using renewable and sustainable energy. The majority of both countries run on solar, geothermal and hydrogen energy and hydro-power. The Swiss and Icelandic governments both monitor the amount of energy consumption per household. Depending on that data, they offer tax incentives or penalties as rewards or punishments for being green or not. Tax incentives include a reduction on payroll, sales tax, property tax, and corporate tax, and can even eliminate a certain tax altogether. Penalties increase the amount of money owed on such things as license fees, duties, and site values. Tax incentives and penalties are not limited to the main Swiss and Icelandic governments. Local businesses and governments also use incentives and laws to help make their countries green. Many hotels in Switzerland offer a twenty percent discount to any guest who arrives in a hybrid car. Additionally, many towns in both countries are “walking towns” by law. This means that no motor vehicles are allowed in these areas. This significantly reduces the carbon emissions of these towns, which in turn may benefit the whole community when the larger governments consider which districts have fewer carbon emissions when applying tax incentives. Lastly, both countries are very dedicated to finding new ways to create and re-purpose energy by using fuel cells and re-purposed CO₂. They use organic agriculture and have plans to make more national parks to keep green space around their communities.

         Both countries are very invested in maintaining green economies. Switzerland and Iceland are two of many countries that have recognized the importance of a green economy and are making serious efforts to help save the planet. These governments have done a good job of creating and using a system that helps both of their economies be more efficient and Eco-friendly. 

Melissa on Freedom of the Press & Social Freedom

The World Press Freedom Index measures the quantity of information a country’s citizens have access to, how legitimate the information is, and what information the government permits the journalists to release.  Finland has assumed the number one ranking on the list for the fourth year in a row.  Finland’s strong belief in individual awareness and practice of a relatively honest government reflect the country’s culture and environment.  Its government deserves credit for the achievement.  It has gone out of its way to not only protect the freedom of the press, but also to enhance it with new technology.  By doing so, the government gives the impression of genuineness, rather than a body that works against the people.  The final outcome is a united nation consisting of well-read and globally aware citizens that trust in their transparent government.

            Newspaper readers and electronic media consumers occupy the majority of the nation’s population.  There is a strong demand for journalism and an even stronger association protecting them – the Union of Journalists.  The union fights for journalists’ copyrights, pay, and working conditions, domestically and internationally.  The logic behind this is that an improved working environment equates to improved journalism.  Finland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs actually created a website for foreign journalists who require additional resources such as maps, statistics, even the contact information for the members of higher power in government. (The President of Finland’s legitimate e-mail address is provided by the website as well.) 

            The Ministry of Transport and Communications has made it its top priority to discover and release innovative technology to support informing the public.  After all, Finland was the first country to pass laws granting the right of access to broadband connection.  As of 2012, it also began crowd-sourcing laws, allowing citizens to vote on and/or criticize legislation via the Internet.  Although this process was not necessarily revolutionary, it appealed to a larger and younger audience, perhaps one that did not feel as included prior to this system’s installment.  Such is Finland’s ultimate goal: including the entirety of the nation and ensuring that all fears, ideas, and opinions may be expressed in mediums from tradition to innovation.

CJ on Healthcare

According to the World Heath Organization’s ranking of world health care systems, France was ranked as the best in the world, and Italy was ranked as the second best. The rankings by the WHO are based on the five different factors of, health equality, general health, responsiveness, responsiveness equality, and fair financial contribution. If a nation was going to remodel their healthcare system or even start one from scratch, they would definitely want to look at the factors that made France and Italy successful in that domain. In both France and Italy the government is heavily involved in the management of their healthcare systems. While the majority of general physicians in France are in private practice, Italy is a mix between public and private practices. In both France and Italy, all doctors draw their incomes from public insurance funds managed by the government. The French government has taken control over these public insurance funds in order to set premium levels, and to determine the amount of money refunded to patients based on their incomes. For long-term illnesses the French government refunds patients 100% of the costs, and for most standard healthcare costs the government refunds around 70% of the costs.

            Italian healthcare prices are also weighted based on the patient’s income; meaning that the poor generally pay less for their healthcare, and the rich pay more for their healthcare. Some in a society where this is the policy may claim that weighting healthcare prices in the favor of the poor is unfair for they rich that may or may not had to work hard for their money, but it is the only way that the system can be functional, and it just makes sense that people with money to spare should share it with the less fortunate. One argument against universal healthcare systems is that everything takes too long, but in the Italian healthcare system if a patient wants their healthcare expedited and they have money to spare they can opt in for the free market option, and pay for their healthcare directly out of their pocket. One may argue all that they want about France and Italy’s healthcare systems, but one can not argue against the great results that occurred because of their healthcare policies. 

Darby on Education

Hidden behind the doors of schools all over the world are secrets for bettering the education system of today’s society. What are those countries doing to make their students repeatedly score above the rest of the world? What is the government’s role in these schools that again and again prove to be more efficient than the rest? To explore this topic and be able to construct the ideal education system we should look to none other than the top education system in the world: Finland.

            Finland is a country that avoids competitive, high-stakes tests. There are no mandated standardized tests, besides one exam at the end of the students’ senior year in high school. There are no rankings, comparisons or competition between students, schools or regions. Finland’s schools are publicly funded and every school has the same national goals and draws from the same pool of university-trained educators. This results in all Finnish children getting the same quality education no matter whether they live in a rural village or a university town. Students only begin compulsory school at age seven because Finnish educators believe there is no hurry since children learn better when they are ready. Students complete secondary school at age fifteen or sixteen and then, based on their grades, go to either vocational school or upper secondary school. Teachers in Finland spend fewer hours at school each day and spend less time in classrooms than American teachers. This extra time is used to build curricula and better assess students. Finnish children spend far more time playing outside and homework is minimal.

            As for the government’s role in Finland’s education system, it is far greater than that in other countries. It’s almost unheard of for a Finnish child to show up hungry or homeless. Finland provides three years of maternity leave and subsidized day care to parents. The government provides preschool for all five year-olds, where the emphasis is on play and socializing. In addition, the state subsidizes parents, paying them around 150 euros (about $205 dollars) per month for every child until he or she turns seventeen. Schools provide food, medical care, counseling, and taxi service if it is needed. Also, stu­dent health care is free.

            A non-competitive, more stress-free environment, along with a stronger role from the government seems to be the most ideal education system. In the end, it is a country’s education system that is preparing its youth to be the leaders of the future, and the more they put into it, the more they will get out of it. 

Christina on Poverty

In an ideal country, there would be no poverty, income inequality, or unemployment. In previous decades, to attain economic equality for all, a country would have to follow a set of rules that initially looked good on paper, but once put into action, could become the biggest demise of the rights of the individual. This phenomenon is called communism: the money-less, stateless, and classless social order based on the idea that everyone owns everything. However, Taiwan (Republic of China) has almost completely eradicated poverty, with a poverty rate of 1.16%, while maintaining a constitutional republic and a constantly expanding economy. We have been desperately looking for a middle ground, and I think we have found one in Taiwan.

            Since the 1990s, the Taiwanese government has spent over $5.08 billion dollars on social welfare programs to assist the lower-income citizens and eventually bring them over the poverty line. For children, a program has been enacted that protects children from abuse, drugs, gangs, and violence. It promotes a healthy and safe school environment and examines the safety of the food and objects children encounter. Under the National Health Insurance (NHI) program, children under three years old are granted subsidies for medical treatment. The aging threshold in Taiwan is growing, so they also have many programs in place for the elderly. A middle or low-income citizen 65 years or older receives about the equivalent of $100 monthly under the NHI program. In 2007, the government passed a long-term system to assist senior citizens in need of full-time medical attention. Also, in July 2007, the National Pension Act was passed, stating that any adult between the age of 25 and 65 who was not covered by any of the other insurance plans was to be included in the national pension. So, theoretically, every citizen in Taiwan is covered by insurance. According to the United Nations, the key to low poverty rates is slow population growth. Thailand has instituted health/family-planning programs for mothers, which allow them to have fewer children and allocate more time for each child, inducing better family nutrition, education levels, and a higher standard of living.

            The key to a reduction in poverty is a focus on social welfare programs and slow population growth. If a government provides the necessities of life to its citizens (like health insurance), then the individual can supersede the poverty line and become able to enjoy life. With a slower population growth, the cost of social welfare programs dwindles and allows a government to provide the necessities of life for its citizens.

Brooke on Green Government

Countries around the world are adopting renewable energy solutions as a measure

of protecting themselves against the effects of global warming and climate change. The goals further include promoting an increase in sustainable ecosystems, and a government that actively enforces green policies. A country known for breathtaking nature and scenic views, continuously finds itself leading the way to an environmentally green society. Switzerland successfully has mastered increasing their natural resources, along with maintaining immaculate environmental conditions, and biodiversity. The Swiss government has tackled dilemmas such as unhygienic water resources and air pollution so effectively, that they have become a role model for other countries. Switzerland’s success is a direct reflection of a government and its people actively working together to achieve remarkable success in creating a greener society.

            Environmental protection for Switzerland has been tradition, dating back to 1914, when the nation created the oldest national Alpine park, the first in the Alps and in Central Europe. Today, there is strong legislation to create another twenty parks throughout Switzerland. This country’s water resources are also used for a variety of purposes, and are monitored for overuse and pollution by the Federal Office for the Environment. Protection of waterways is inscribed in the Swiss Constitution. As a result, the drinking water that comes out of Swiss taps is as pure as bottled mineral water, and five hundred times cheaper.

            The capital of Switzerland is Bern, where buses display a huge white leaf logo notifying the public that they are powered by methane. The fuel cost is forty percent lower than standard diesel oil, and the methane is produced from sewage plants. The Swiss government has proposed legislation to lower taxes on fuels that produce fewer harmful emissions, and abolish taxes completely on fuels from renewable resources. In order to further fight air pollution, the Swiss government has required all diesel cars to be fitted with particle filters. Whole towns are even designated as walking towns with no gas vehicles allowed. Switzerland also promotes buildings that use eco-friendly materials because they consume twenty-five percent less energy than ordinary buildings. The government issues a label that is proudly displayed, that certifies a building as energy saving.

            Switzerland is a true leader in government enforced recycling. Recyclable items are required to be divided into bins according to colors, such as white, brown, or green. It is required by law to purchase special trash bags for garbage, and fines are enforced as much as $170, if recyclables and trash are not separated according to government standards. As an incentive the Swiss government charges a tax on households based on the volume of trash they put out to collect. The intention is to recycle more items and produce less trash.

            Perhaps Switzerland’s greatest green society accomplishment is yet to come. The Swiss government has made a decision to phase out nuclear power completely over the next few decades. This requires an extreme reduction of energy and electricity consumption. Switzerland and its people will have to rethink they way they consume energy and find other means of relying on alternative sources in the future. One of the federal government’s goals is the expansion of Switzerland’s hydro-power, its most important and longest serving source of renewable energy.       

This country is a symbol of what can be achieved globally, and sets the highest bar for others to follow. Switzerland’s achievements and severe measures in environmental green standards exist because they are actively respected in their society’s daily lives. A new country would be able to refer to these ideals and create a society that would not have the burden of reversing careless damage and neglect. The citizens would accept its government’s laws from the beginning to ensure that a clean environment exists for themselves, and generations to follow.

Annemiek on Poverty

One of the world’s most significant obstacles to overcome is poverty. In 2012 almost half the world, three billion people, lived on less than $2.50 a day. The average poverty line in developing countries is $2 a day. Taiwan is the country with the lowest poverty rate of 1.16% of its citizens living below the poverty line. By observing Taiwan, a foundation for reducing the amount of poverty in other countries around the world can be built.

            In 1999, the Taiwanese government spent about $5.08 billion on social welfare programs. This allows the government to provide assistance to its impoverished citizens. It aids with job-placement for the wage earners in the family, educational aid for school-age children, and health programs for mothers and children. In addition to that, the government provides a monthly subsidy to the elderly or disabled that are not able to work. The government also pays the health premium in full for low-income households in its National Health Insurance program, and it provides emergency financial aid if needed. Any citizen that is ages 25 to 65 and are not covered by specific social insurance programs, such as one for laborers or members of the military, are covered under the National Pension Act. This extends the net of social insurance to the entire adult population in Taiwan. The Indigenous Peoples Basic Act requires the government to provide resources to the indigenous groups to help them to develop a system of self-governance, conceive policies that protect their rights, and preserve their language and culture. These social welfare programs aid the Taiwanese government in regulating and reducing the poverty.

            The US has similar policies such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, yet in 2010 15.1% of Americans lived in poverty. Population also factors into poverty, because the more inhabitants a country has, the more money that is needed to have a safety net for them. Taiwan has a population of roughly 23 million; the US has a population of about 313 million. The ideal country would have a medium sized population and be able to provide a safety net for every one of its citizens. Social welfare programs allow the country to prevent poverty by having a support system for its citizens

The more money that is spent on the people, aids the country in moving forward and overcoming the obstacle of poverty. 

Hugh on GDP

GDP or Gross domestic product is a statistical measure that is used to evaluate the condition of a countries economy. Simply stated, Gross domestic product is the monetary value of the final goods and services produced by a country. In evaluating the health of a country’s economy, people look at whether the output of the country is causing economic growth or whether it’s doing little to nothing for the country’s economy. When a country’s output is on the rise, consumers are buying more products or spending a large amount of money on varying services, when outputs are on the decline consumers are not spending as much. It is thought that GDP is a measure of how healthy a country’s economy is; a more accurate statement would be that GDP is really a measure economic growth and sales in terms of production. For a deeper understanding of what goes into evaluating a country economically, is to understand all of the parts that make up how GDP is calculated.  As indicated above, the largest part of figuring GDP is measuring the consumption of durable and non-durable goods and services.  Another important part of figuring a nation’s GDP is measuring its different investments by both businesses and consumers, this type of investment is not the movement of existing assets, but the investment and production put into the creation of new assets. The last two major components are the measure of government spending, and the country’s exports minus their imports. (Callen) As Americans we have a high GDP, in fact we have the highest GDP, because we are a massive nation and we are packed with thousands of massive international corporations, and we also use many of the resources we own already. Smaller countries tend to have lower GDP because trade isn’t on the same scale as larger countries, they also (for the most part) don’t have as large a population or as many natural resources.   

Countries with some of the highest GDP figures are the United States, China, Japan, Germany, France, Brazil the UK and Italy. (Statistics Brain) Ironically, almost all of the countries on this list of highest GDP also have some of the highest economic debt. (Williams) What GDP does not take into consideration are all of the negative effects that come with all of the international and nation-wide spending done. For example, the money spent on cigarettes is included in a country’s GDP, but what is not considered in the calculations, are the negative health effects that the product has on the population. So in reality although the GDP will have gone up because of the sale of cigarettes, as well as the money being spent on the medical care of those who develop an illness due to the use of cigarettes; what is not considered is the overall health of the population.   Another example is if there were some sort of epidemic to plague the U.S., and 75% of the population became infected and needed medical care, this would cause the country’s GDP to skyrocket, because of the money being spent on providing care for those who are sick. Although the GDP would have risen immensely, a very large portion of the workforce would be unable to work, and the countries production and sales of goods and services would diminish rapidly. Another way a country’s GDP can grow is if a country builds an excess of houses, this investment increases GDP as measured and can divert resources and energy from something society might need more. Although the GDP system may be the most effective way to accurately measure a country’s economic success, it is still a broken system. However, even though the system is flawed, it still works for the most part, which is why we use it. The only way a new system will be implemented is if it were able to more accurately measure the positive growth factors and not include all of the negative growth factors. Because GDP is an international standard, this type of change would be a huge challenge and right now, it isn’t worth a single country’s time or money to change an international system that works okay.

Citations

“Countries with the Highest GDP – Statistic Brain.”
2013 Statistic Brain Research Institute, publishing as Statistic Brain.
February 19^th, 2014
http://www.statisticbrain.com/countries-with-the-highest-gdp/

Callen, Tim.  “Gross Domestic Product: An Economy’s All” Finance & Development Magazine. International Monetary Fund.  March 28, 2012.  February 19^th, 2014  https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/gdp.htm

Kurtzleben, Danielle.  “The 10 Countries with the Most Debt” US News and World Reports.                                                                                                             

January 28, 2011.  February 20^th, 2014

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/01/28/the-10-countries-with-the-most-debt

Williams, Ray.  “Why the GDP Is Not An Good Measure of A Nation's Well Being”  Psychology Today

September 12, 2013. February 20^th, 2014

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201309/why-the-gdp-is-not-good-measure-nations-well-being

Cole on Justice

Justice is the pedestal for all moral compasses.  It deems what is right, what is wrong, who is redeemed, and who is punished. In order to instill a sense of protection over their people, the best governments follow similar trends in crime and punishment.  The best governments enlist a well-paid, large police force, rehabilitate offenders, and set quotas on working class immigrants.

            A highly trained and paid police force handles crime effectively, opposed to corruption, and gives an empowering, strong image to the people.  In developed countries like The United States, Canada, U.K, etc, violent crimes have drastically decreased within the last five decades, but police forces have increased.  Canada, one of the safest counties in the world, increased its police force by 9% sine 2001.  Unlike other public-sector employees, police budgets and salaries have increased 5%. Why does Canada treat its officers so well?  Two reasons: 1. To eradicate corruption and 2. To show citizens the government cares about their safety.  The reason South American police forces are known for being so corrupt is their minuscule wages. On to number two, a large police force illustrates a sense of protection to the population’s well being.  It also discourages any criminals from attempting crimes due to the high chance that they will be caught.  But, what happens to the criminals who do go to jail? Along with the progressive police force, a new form of prison has been created not just to punish the prisoner, but to try and rehabilitate him.

            Rehabilitation in prison is drastically lowers the re-offending rate and forms support organizations founded by formal criminals.  In Sweden, the old-style, traditional prison system is being replaced by a system devoted on rehabilitating the inmate.  Instead of sitting in a cell all day, the inmate attends treatment programs correlating to his crime, anywhere from drug rehab to anger management.  When they finish their sentences, all inmates are placed into a probation system, which continues trying to help criminals obtain a better education and continues to provide treatment programs.  With all of these safety nets, the re-offending rate of 30% is drastically lower than the United States’ of 70%.  The U.S still follows the belief that the only way to eradicate crime is to punish offenders, locking them in a cell for a majority of the day and releasing them back into the wild when their sentences have been served. 

            The last policy to a successful justice system is a quota on the number of lower-class immigrants. This is not derived superstitious xenophobia, but derived from statistics that found that poor immigrants have trouble finding jobs and turn to crime.  For example, Denmark’s immigrants comprise 2.2% of the total population, while committing 70% of crime.  Recently in Switzerland, the ‘free-movement’ policy of the EU was rejected, due to the prosperity of the economy and low-unemployment.  In order to keep this successful state, immigration needs to be highly regulated.  If the Swiss keep this policy, there are unlikely to meet the same fate as their EU neighbors, France and Germany, who are dealing with the backlash of immigrants.