Trade has ruined not one yet. “Trade has never ruined a single nation.” (B. Franklin). There is no force that can force"

B. Franklin).

American scientist and politician Benjamin Franklin wanted to emphasize the benefits that trade brings to the economic prosperity of society. I think we have to agree with this.

Barter exchange as a form of distribution of produced labor products began to develop back in ancient times. Over time, people realized the need to introduce an equivalent. From this moment we can actually talk about trading. The universal goods were furs, metal rods, as in the times of the Iliad and Odyssey, shells, etc. Later, pieces and ingots of precious metals and money began to be used.

Today, trade is the most common form of exchange in which ownership of a good (good, service) passes from one to another through the mediation of money. Trade can serve as a unifying factor in the economic and socio-political development of a country. Trade truly united Rus'. Merchant caravans stretched along land roads and rivers. Carts with grain from the Dnieper region went to Novgorod; salt was brought from Volyn; from north to south - furs, fish. Russian merchants brought leather, wax, linen for sails, silver and bone products to other countries. Fabrics, weapons, and jewelry came from other countries. In the 17th century the development of trade led to the formation of the all-Russian market as a system of universal economic ties. Trade connected all Russian lands into a single economic complex and accelerated the formation of the Russian nation.

Today, in the context of globalization, trade is increasingly becoming global. The market, as a sphere of interaction between money, goods, services, labor resources, the whole world becomes. Developed trade is an indicator of a successful and stable economic development the country as a whole. I believe that our trade is one-sided. We mainly sell natural resources: oil, gas, timber, seafood. It would be more profitable to sell not only hydrocarbons, but also finished goods, including high-tech ones. This is the direction in which the economy must be developed.

So, I agree with the opinion of an outstanding American politician about the role of trade. It's time for our politicians to realize this.

C8.4. – Sociology

Inequality is just as good a law

Nature, like everyone else"

(I. Sherr).

How should we understand the words of the famous German publicist and public figure of the 18th century? Johann Scherr? Scherr says that inequality is as good a law of nature as any other law of nature. I agree with the writer's position. It is stupid to deny the objective laws of nature. They need to be known and taken into account in life. But what does this statement have to do with society?

First of all, we should remember that nature is natural environment habitat of man as a biological being. People are born inheriting many of the characteristics of their parents. Some are naturally quick-witted, others are more thoughtful, some are physically strong, others are more resilient, etc. Physical and mental traits of individuality become the natural basis for a unique socialization of the individual. In an effort to adapt to society, to adapt to it, each person uses his natural abilities. A strong man becomes an athlete, a smart man becomes a manager, and a thoughtful man becomes a philosopher.

Natural data is a prerequisite for what social status a particular person is likely to occupy. But biological inclinations are only the basis for the development of socially significant personality traits. Whether the inclinations of ability develop or not also depends on upbringing, agents of socialization, and the macrosocial environment of personality formation. In adulthood, self-education becomes important, as a person’s conscious influence on himself, the fight against his shortcomings. Thus, Alexander Suvorov was a frail boy as a child, but wanting to become a military man, he began to harden himself, engaged in physical exercises and achieved that he was accepted into the army. The small stature of many ambitious people pushes them to strive to prove themselves in something else. It’s not for nothing that there are so many small artists on the stage who have become “big” and “major”.

I believe that natural inequality and social inequality should not be confused. Even natural deficiencies can become a prerequisite for successful implementation person in society.

C8.5. – Political Science

"Democracy is the right to do

Incorrect choice"

(J. Patrick)

American journalist and politician J. Patrick, author of the book “The Death of the West,” characterizes democracy as the right to free choice, even if sometimes erroneous. I, perhaps, agree with the position of the quoted person, although he does not point out the advantages of democracy, but one of its shortcomings. Indeed, democracy, like any other political system, is not without its shortcomings. The English poet Oscar Wilde remarked: “Democracy is the fooling of the people, with the help of the people, for the good of the people.” But people have not yet come up with a better political regime than democracy.

Democracy, as a political regime, that is, a system of relations between the state and civil society, is characterized primarily by the fact that the people are considered the source of power in it. And he has the right to make mistakes. People for various reasons (under the influence of the media, under the influence of the charisma of a political leader) can make a mistake in their choice. But they themselves are paying for their delusion.

In my opinion, the Americans made a mistake in electing George W. Bush as president. He dragged the United States into the war in Iraq, and under him a financial crisis began in the country. In November 2008, Americans elected a young and ambitious candidate from the Democratic Party, Barack Obama. For the first time in US history, a black citizen became president. Americans pin their hopes on him to correct the mistakes made by his predecessor.

Voters in Russia, using the right of direct, equal, secret voting in democratic elections, elected a young but already experienced politician, Dmitry Medvedev, as president. He, like Vladimir Putin, represents a new generation of Russian politicians. United into a team of like-minded people, they intend to make our country prosperous and comfortable for ordinary citizens.

I believe that democracy is a genuine form of manifestation of political democracy. It assumes that every citizen is responsible for his choice, and therefore everyone must navigate politics and be an active participant public life countries.

C8.6. – Jurisprudence

“The law cannot be law if behind it

There is no force that can force"

(D. Garfield)

The statement of James Abraham Garfield, an American politician and US President who lived in the 19th century, continues to be relevant today. A law, as a normative legal act, cannot have the highest legal force if the power of the state is not behind it. I completely agree with Garfield's opinion.

Laws regulate the most important social relations, and violation of laws is unacceptable. That is why laws have the highest legal force. No one has the right to repeal or change the law except the legislature. Roman jurists also said: “The law is harsh, but it is the law,” emphasizing that if a law is adopted, it must be followed. However, the law itself is not implemented. Society is a complex organism, consisting not only of law-abiding people. That is why the state is the only political institution that has the right of legitimate, that is, legal violence. If someone does not want to comply with the laws, they are forced to do so state power.

The weakness of the state is manifested in its inability to insist on compliance with the laws. This was sometimes the case during the years of perestroika, when a separatist rebellion broke out in the Chechen Republic. It was provoked by the liberal policy of the Center in relation to the subjects of the federation. Only the state will demonstrated by President Vladimir Putin made it possible to stop hostilities. The manifestation of strength is sometimes a necessity and in foreign policy. Yes, thanks to the strength Russian army, operating within the norms international law, the genocide of the South Ossetian people was prevented, Abkhazia and South Ossetia became subjects of international law.

If in certain crisis periods of the development of society, such as, for example, in war time or in conditions of an economic crisis, the law infringes on someone’s interests, it does not cease to be binding legal document. A democratic state acts in the interests of the whole society, and it must protect both society and itself, as a mechanism of governance, by all legal means.

(G.S. Becker)

What does price mean and what other market instruments did Becker have in mind? Price is the monetary expression of the value of a product. In our opinion, when speaking about other market instruments, the author most likely meant supply and demand and their interaction. More precisely, the law of demand (there is an inversely proportional relationship between price and volume of demand; when the price increases, the volume of demand decreases) and the law of supply (there is a direct relationship between the volume of supply and the price of a product, i.e., as the product increases, the volume of supply increases). Thus, price, the laws of supply and demand regulate the market, the number of participants in it, and coordinate their actions. And we agree with this. For example, the oil industry is highly profitable. However, not everyone can engage in oil production, since this activity requires expensive equipment that not only small entrepreneurs, but even some countries cannot afford. The fact has not yet been forgotten that in the mid-90s of the 20th century, oil was searched for in the Yantikovsky region of the Chuvash Republic. This did not happen for the money of the republic, but was provided by one of the large companies, engaged in oil exploration and production in the country. Or another example, black and red caviar are a delicacy, everyone would like to have them on their table, but because of the high cost, not every family can afford it. The production of caviar is limited, otherwise the price of caviar will fall, and the profit will remain unchanged both with an increased volume, but a low price, and with a low volume, but a high selling price. On the other hand, it contributes to the conservation of limited natural resources. Price and other market instruments act as the invisible hand of the market that regulates scarce resources in the economy.

“Trade has never ruined a single nation.”

(B. Franklin)

I believe that well-developed relations in a country are a sign of a developed economic life of the country. Therefore, the President of Chuvashia N.V. Fedorov often says: To establish yourself well, you need to enter the European market. The concept of “market” implies the sphere of exchange of goods for money and money for goods, interaction of producers and consumers on a regional, national and global scale. Chuvashia is already trying to enter the European market. By organizing various exhibitions, we attract various investors who enter into agreements to purchase our national products. Thus, we receive money, and they receive goods. Their money goes to the production of new goods, and our goods go to develop their economy. Therefore, I agree with the statement that trade has not yet ruined a single nation.

Associated with this file 51 file(s). Among them: and another 41 file(s).
Show all linked files

38. “Trade has never ruined a single nation.” (B. Franklin)

The author wanted to say that engaging in trading activities is useful for society, this can lead to its prosperity. I think we have to agree with this. Trade has evolved since the development of social relations.
Some sell, others buy. Trade also took place when there were no coins. Money could be animal skins, precious metals, etc.
Trade is the most common form of exchange in which ownership of a good (good, service) is transferred from one to another through money. Trade can serve as a unifying factor for a country and even the world. Let's take for example Ancient Rus'. Trade truly united
Rus. Merchant caravans stretched along land roads and rivers. IN
Carts with grain from the Dnieper region were coming to Novgorod; Salt was brought from Volyn to all lands; from north to south - furs, fish. Russian merchants brought leather, wax, linen for sails, silver and bone products to other countries. Foreign goods arrived from other countries: fabrics, weapons, precious stones, jewelry, church utensils, wine. Thus, thanks to trade, prosperity and development of states occurred.
I believe that well-developed relations in a country are a sign of a developed economic life of the country. Therefore, the President of Chuvashia N.V. Fedorov often says: To establish yourself well, you need to enter the European market. The concept of “market” implies the sphere of exchange of goods for money and money for goods, interaction of producers and consumers on a regional, national or global scale. Chuvashia is already trying to enter the European market.
By organizing various exhibitions, we attract various investors who enter into agreements to purchase our national products. Thus, we receive money, and they receive goods. Their money goes to the production of new goods, and our goods go to develop their economy.
Therefore, I agree with the statement that trade has not yet ruined a single nation.
39. “Not to be greedy is already wealth, not to be wasteful is income.”
(M. Montaigne)
In my opinion, this statement is akin to the saying: “It is not the one who has a lot of money who is rich, but the one who has fewer needs.” What are these statements about, what is their essence? Each person determines for himself whether he is rich or not, although sometimes his assessment is based on comparison with other people.
A greedy person always lacks something. Very shining example something similar can be found in Gogol’s “Dead Souls,” where Plyushkin doesn’t have enough of everything. His chests are full of wealth, and he dresses and eats like a beggar. In modern life, everything is the same, someone doesn’t have enough money for a two-level apartment, and he “considers himself poor, and someone considers himself rich, because... he has bread on his table every day. However, there is another side to this. Wealth is not only the absence of greed, but also frugality, rationalism and pragmatism.
Let us analyze the second half of M. Montaigne’s phrase “not to be wasteful is income.”

Income is the totality of all financial resources received by a person necessary to pay for the material side of his life. Expenditures of the population are called consumption. A rational consumer must be guided by the rational organization of his life, efficient production activities, and optimization of consumption. If you are not a rational consumer, a situation may arise where expenses will exceed income.
And here it depends not on the amount of wealth a person has, but on the ability to manage it. There have been many cases in history when rich nobles brought their fortunes to bankruptcy, but there were many peasants who, thanks to their labor, became prosperous. Or another example: Ford began his career with the first car. If he had spent the money he received only on current needs, he would never have been able to found a car company. The investment of initial capital in the business became the basis of his wealth. Therefore, I agree with M. Montaigne’s statement.
40. “Competition is the only method of mutual coordination of our
individual
actions
without
coercion
or
arbitrary
interference from the authorities." (F. Hayek)
Since this statement is given in the “economics” section, competition should be understood as the economic rivalry of participants economic activity in the struggle to achieve better results. It seems to me that the author’s definition of competition accurately defines its essence. Competition is a regulator of not only economic, but also political, cultural, and interpersonal relations.
Competition performs the function of mutual coordination of our actions without interference from authorities: people compete for better results, greater profits, Better conditions life. In the course of competition, they objectively change the objects around them, their relationships, adapt to each other, strive to keep up with others, i.e. They carry out mutual coordination of actions. For example, some product is presented in excess on the market, i.e.
The quantity supplied is greater than the quantity demanded. This is where the law of competition comes into play: by increasing efficiency, a manufacturer can reduce production costs, reduce the cost of goods, improve their quality and, ultimately, reduce prices for their goods. This will “spur” other manufacturers to respond. A decrease in price will lead to an increase in the quantity demanded for this product. Thus, competition can, without any government intervention, regulate supply and demand and coordinate the actions of various producers. You can give other examples of competition that are not related to economics: a competition of musical groups, presidential elections, entrance exams, etc. Thus, competition is a universal regulator of the entire life of society.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
41. “The party is organized public opinion.” (B. Disraeli)
One cannot but agree with the opinion of the 19th century English politician B.
Disraeli. Parties represent public opinion in all its diversity in politics. According to the law of the Russian Federation “On political parties“A party is defined as an association that has a stable structure and permanent nature of activity, expresses the political will of its members and supporters and sets its main objectives to participate in determining the political course of the country, forming bodies of state power and administration, as well as exercising power through its representatives. Parties represent the interests of various segments of the population in politics. Thus, the Communist Party represents the interests of low-income citizens and advocates for the expansion of social policy and equation of states. The Union of Right Forces (SPS), on the contrary, represents the interests of entrepreneurs and wealthy citizens and defends freedom of enterprise and business interests. The parties have organizational structure, which allows them to prepare for elections, develop their plans for the reconstruction of society, and protect the interests of their supporters when preparing bills in parliament. Political socialization of citizens occurs through parties: all citizens cannot be deputies, but can participate in the work of one or another party and, through it, inform government agencies your opinion on this or that issue. The Russian Federation now has a multi-party system that corresponds to the diversity of political interests Russian society. For example, the United
Russia supported the monetization of benefits, representing the interests of the working population, while the communists opposed the reform, representing the interests of pensioners. Therefore, I agree with Disraeli: “a party is organized public opinion.”
42. “It is not true that politics is the art of the possible. Policy -
it is a choice between disastrous and unpleasant.” (John Galbraith)
In saying this, D. Galbraith was probably recalling the history of the origin of the concept of “politics”. Politics in ancient times meant the art of governing.
Therefore, the better the activity of a politician, the more skillful his management was considered. In ancient times, everything seemed to depend on the politician, on his art, skill, it seemed that a skillful politician could work miracles, could beautifully solve all complex problems. However, antiquity is always shrouded in legends and secrets. Modern life seems much more difficult.
Now politics is not only the art of management, it is the activity of large groups, states, parties aimed at seizing power or retaining it. I
I agree that politics is a choice between disastrous and unpleasant. How often do politicians have to make this choice? Sometimes, indeed, it is difficult to deceive the expectations of your voters and people, but it is sometimes necessary. From history we recall a fact related to the French President Charles de

Golem. In his election program, he claimed that he would not give Algeria independence (at that time, “Algeria was a French colony”), but, becoming president of France, he gave Algeria freedom. Of course, on the one hand, he deceived his citizens, this is unpleasant, but on the other hand ", the war for Algeria could bring a lot of problems to France. And de Gaulle's choice was correct. From the history of our state, we know Kutuzov's decision to leave Moscow, but keep the army, in order to then defeat Napoleon's invaders. And again, this was the right decision, although many were dissatisfied with him History has proven this, and we can only agree with the statement of John Galbraith.
JURISPRUDENCE
43. “Let the world perish, but the law must be observed.” (saying
Roman law)
This statement is so paradoxical that it is difficult to both agree and disagree with it completely. On the one hand, I agree that the law must be respected. After all, laws are adopted in a special order and have the highest legal force regulations expressing the state will on key issues of public life. Laws regulate the most important social relations, and violation of laws can lead to the death of society. Therefore, laws have the highest legal force. No one has the right to repeal or change a law except the body that issued it. Roman jurists also said, “The law is harsh, but it must be observed.” However, from the standpoint of humanism, one cannot agree that the world must collapse due to formal compliance with the law. Let's imagine a situation where a fire started at a secret military facility. By law, only people with special passes have access to the facility. So why not let the firefighters in?
It is not without reason that some human rights activists say that law is “legalized justice” and the law cannot violate a person’s natural gifts from birth, freedom. In my opinion, it is necessary to observe a certain compromise: in normal circumstances the law cannot be violated, but in a state of emergency, if we're talking about about the destruction of the world, it is better that the law perish.
If the understanding of justice in society changes, then the law must change. Thus, according to the famous Stalinist law “On Spikelets,” mothers with many children, whose husbands died in the war, went to prison for digging up a bucket of frozen potatoes in a collective farm field. To avoid such a choice: fair laws, thought out by all branches of government, are needed.
44. “Who, having the opportunity to prevent a crime, does not
this, he helps him.” (Seneca)
I completely agree with the statement of the Roman philosopher. Indeed, a person who can prevent and avoid a crime and does not do so becomes an accomplice, an accomplice. Let's remember what a crime is.
This is a socially dangerous act encroaching on law and order, provided for

Criminal Code. The hallmarks of a crime are illegality, special social danger, guilt, and punishability. Under the expression
“socially dangerous act” is understood as a dangerous manifestation of deviant behavior that causes the greatest damage to society. However, an act refers not only to action, but also to inaction. For example, a person who robbed an apartment is certainly a criminal, but his friend, who knew about the robber’s intentions and did not try to stop him or report it to the police, can also be called a criminal. Or let’s take a car enthusiast whose car’s brakes are acting up. Knowing this, he drives onto the highway and, losing control, runs into a passerby. He is undoubtedly a criminal, although technical expertise may find him innocent. In order for there to be fewer crimes, a high level of legal culture of all citizens is necessary. After all legal culture- this is not only knowledge of the laws, their strict observance, but also the desire to actively promote law and order and prevent crimes. Therefore, every citizen, knowing about an impending crime, is obliged to try to prevent it or report it to law enforcement agencies.
45. “By sparing criminals, they harm honest people” (Seneca)
The outstanding philosopher Seneca lived during the Roman Empire. What did he mean by this phrase? By not punishing criminals at all, or by not punishing them properly, we are harming honest, law-abiding citizens. And although many centuries have passed since then, Seneca’s words remain relevant. And I agree with his opinion, the essence of the crime remains the same. Who are the criminals? These are people who committed a crime.
According to the definition, a crime is a public act that encroaches on law and order, as provided for in the criminal code. The features of the crime are the illegality of the act, guilt, special social danger, and strict punishability. If the first two characteristics are true for any offense, then the last two are true for a crime. This suggests that if an offense can affect a person indirectly, then people face crime directly. Crimes can be classified: against the individual, against sexual integrity, against family and minors, in the economic sphere, planning and waging war, illegal production, storage and sale of narcotic drugs and others. Of course, all this harms people. Here we can focus on two aspects. Firstly, if the criminal is not punished, then criminal acts may be repeated. This is even the theme for films. Among the latest is the series “Deadly Force,” where a mother-judge covers for her son, who committed a robbery and killed two policemen. Their acquittal by the court prompted him to commit new crimes.
The second aspect of the problem is the victims. Seeing that the court cannot punish, many take the path of lynching. Here again we can remember

another Russian series “Kamenskaya”, where juvenile criminals killed the only son in a military family. After this, the mother lost her mind, and the father began to arrange the death of the perpetrators.
Are these examples, in your opinion, isolated?! Unfortunately, no. Open any newspaper and you will come across similar information on the “Crime” page.
Therefore, despite the passage of centuries, I consider Seneca’s words to be relevant and topical today.

“Trade has never ruined a single nation.” (B. Franklin)

"Not to be greedy - there is already wealth, not to be wasteful - income." (M. Montaigne)

In my opinion, this statement is akin to the saying: “It is not the one who has a lot of money who is rich, but the one who has fewer needs.” What are these statements about, what is their essence? Each person determines for himself whether he is rich or not, although sometimes his assessment is based on comparison with other people. A greedy person always lacks something. A very striking example of this can be found in Gogol’s “Dead Souls,” where Plyushkin doesn’t have enough of everything. His chests are full of wealth, and he dresses and eats like a beggar. In modern life, everything is the same, someone does not have enough money for a two-level apartment, and he “considers himself poor, and someone considers himself rich, because he has bread on the table every day. However, there is another side . Wealth is not only the absence of greed, but also frugality, rationalism and pragmatism. Let us analyze the second half of M. Montaigne’s phrase “not to be wasteful is income.” Income is the totality of all financial resources received by a person necessary to pay for the material side of his life. Expenses of the population are called consumption. A rational consumer must be guided by the rational organization of his life, efficient production activities, optimization of consumption. If you are not a rational consumer, a situation may arise that expenses will exceed income. And here it depends not on the amount of wealth a person has, but on skill There have been many cases in history when rich nobles brought their fortunes to bankruptcy, but there were many peasants who, thanks to their labor, became prosperous. Or another example: Ford began his career with the first car. If he had spent the money received only on current needs, he would never have been able to found a car company. The investment of initial capital in the business became the basis of his wealth. Therefore, I agree with M. Montaigne’s statement.

38. “Trade has never ruined a single nation.” (B. Franklin)

The author wanted to say that engaging in trading activities is useful for society, this can lead to its prosperity. I think we have to agree with this. Trade has evolved since the development of social relations.
Some sell, others buy. Trade also took place when there were no coins. Money could be animal skins, precious metals, etc.
Trade is the most common form of exchange in which ownership of a good (good, service) is transferred from one to another through money. Trade can serve as a unifying factor for a country and even the world. Let's take, for example, Ancient Rus'. Trade truly united
Rus. Merchant caravans stretched along land roads and rivers. IN
Carts with grain from the Dnieper region were coming to Novgorod; Salt was brought from Volyn to all lands; from north to south - furs, fish. Russian merchants brought leather, wax, linen for sails, silver and bone products to other countries. Foreign goods arrived from other countries: fabrics, weapons, precious stones, jewelry, church utensils, wine. Thus, thanks to trade, prosperity and development of states occurred.
I believe that well-developed relations in a country are a sign of a developed economic life of the country. Therefore, the President of Chuvashia N.V. Fedorov often says: To establish yourself well, you need to enter the European market. The concept of “market” implies the sphere of exchange of goods for money and money for goods, interaction of producers and consumers on a regional, national or global scale. Chuvashia is already trying to enter the European market.
By organizing various exhibitions, we attract various investors who enter into agreements to purchase our national products. Thus, we receive money, and they receive goods. Their money goes to the production of new goods, and our goods go to develop their economy.
Therefore, I agree with the statement that trade has not yet ruined a single nation.
39. “Not to be greedy is already wealth, not to be wasteful is income.”
(M. Montaigne)
In my opinion, this statement is akin to the saying: “It is not the one who has a lot of money who is rich, but the one who has fewer needs.” What are these statements about, what is their essence? Each person determines for himself whether he is rich or not, although sometimes his assessment is based on comparison with other people.
A greedy person always lacks something. A very striking example of this can be found in Gogol’s “Dead Souls,” where Plyushkin doesn’t have enough of everything. His chests are full of wealth, and he dresses and eats like a beggar. In modern life, everything is the same, someone doesn’t have enough money for a two-level apartment, and he “considers himself poor, and someone considers himself rich, because... he has bread on his table every day. However, there is another side to this. Wealth is not only the absence of greed, but also frugality, rationalism and pragmatism.
Let us analyze the second half of M. Montaigne’s phrase “not to be wasteful is income.”

Income is the totality of all financial resources received by a person necessary to pay for the material side of his life. Expenditures of the population are called consumption. A rational consumer must be guided by the rational organization of his life, efficient production activities, and optimization of consumption. If you are not a rational consumer, a situation may arise where expenses will exceed income.
And here it depends not on the amount of wealth a person has, but on the ability to manage it. There have been many cases in history when rich nobles brought their fortunes to bankruptcy, but there were many peasants who, thanks to their labor, became prosperous. Or another example: Ford began his career with the first car. If he had spent the money he received only on current needs, he would never have been able to found a car company. The investment of initial capital in the business became the basis of his wealth. Therefore, I agree with M. Montaigne’s statement.
40. “Competition is the only method of mutual coordination of our
individual
actions
without
coercion
or
arbitrary
interference from the authorities." (F. Hayek)
Since this statement is given in the “economics” section, competition should be understood as the economic rivalry of participants in economic activities in the struggle to achieve better results. It seems to me that the author’s definition of competition accurately defines its essence. Competition is a regulator of not only economic, but also political, cultural, and interpersonal relations.
Competition performs the function of mutual coordination of our actions without interference from authorities: people compete for better results, greater profits, better living conditions. In the course of competition, they objectively change the objects around them, their relationships, adapt to each other, strive to keep up with others, i.e. They carry out mutual coordination of actions. For example, some product is presented in excess on the market, i.e.
The quantity supplied is greater than the quantity demanded. This is where the law of competition comes into play: by increasing efficiency, a manufacturer can reduce production costs, reduce the cost of goods, improve their quality and, ultimately, reduce prices for their goods. This will “spur” other manufacturers to respond. A decrease in price will lead to an increase in the quantity demanded for this product. Thus, competition can, without any government intervention, regulate supply and demand and coordinate the actions of various producers. You can give other examples of competition that are not related to economics: a competition of musical groups, presidential elections, entrance exams, etc. Thus, competition is a universal regulator of the entire life of society.

POLITICAL SCIENCE
41. “The party is organized public opinion.” (B. Disraeli)
One cannot but agree with the opinion of the 19th century English politician B.
Disraeli. Parties represent public opinion in all its diversity in politics. According to the law of the Russian Federation “On Political Parties”, a party is defined as an association that has a stable structure and permanent nature of activity, expresses the political will of its members and supporters and sets the main objectives of participation in determining the political course of the country, the formation of government bodies and administration, as well as the implementation of authorities through their representatives. Parties represent the interests of various segments of the population in politics. Thus, the Communist Party represents the interests of low-income citizens and advocates for the expansion of social policy and equalization of conditions. The Union of Right Forces (SPS), on the contrary, represents the interests of entrepreneurs and wealthy citizens and defends freedom of enterprise and business interests. Parties have an organizational structure that allows them to prepare for elections, develop their plans for the reconstruction of society, and protect the interests of their supporters when preparing bills in parliament. Through parties, the political socialization of citizens occurs: all citizens cannot be deputies, but they can participate in the work of one or another party and, through it, convey their opinion on this or that issue to government bodies. The Russian Federation now has a multi-party system, which corresponds to the diversity of political interests of Russian society. For example, the United
Russia supported the monetization of benefits, representing the interests of the working population, while the communists opposed the reform, representing the interests of pensioners. Therefore, I agree with Disraeli: “a party is organized public opinion.”
42. “It is not true that politics is the art of the possible. Policy -
it is a choice between disastrous and unpleasant.” (John Galbraith)
In saying this, D. Galbraith was probably recalling the history of the origin of the concept of “politics”. Politics in ancient times meant the art of governing.
Therefore, the better the activity of a politician, the more skillful his management was considered. In ancient times, everything seemed to depend on the politician, on his art, skill, it seemed that a skillful politician could work miracles, could beautifully solve all complex problems. However, antiquity is always shrouded in legends and secrets. Modern life seems much more complicated.
Now politics is not only the art of management, it is the activity of large groups, states, parties aimed at seizing power or retaining it. I
I agree that politics is a choice between disastrous and unpleasant. How often do politicians have to make this choice? Sometimes, indeed, it is difficult to deceive the expectations of your voters and people, but it is sometimes necessary. From history we recall a fact related to the French President Charles de

Golem. In his election program, he claimed that he would not give Algeria independence (at that time, “Algeria was a French colony”), but, becoming president of France, he gave Algeria freedom. Of course, on the one hand, he deceived his citizens, this is unpleasant, but on the other hand ", the war for Algeria could bring a lot of problems to France. And de Gaulle's choice was correct. From the history of our state, we know Kutuzov's decision to leave Moscow, but keep the army, in order to then defeat Napoleon's invaders. And again, this was the right decision, although many were dissatisfied with him History has proven this, and we can only agree with the statement of John Galbraith.
JURISPRUDENCE
43. “Let the world perish, but the law must be observed.” (saying
Roman law)
This statement is so paradoxical that it is difficult to both agree and disagree with it completely. On the one hand, I agree that the law must be respected. After all, laws are normative legal acts adopted in a special order and possessing the highest legal force, expressing the state will on key issues of public life. Laws regulate the most important social relations, and violation of laws can lead to the death of society. Therefore, laws have the highest legal force. No one has the right to repeal or change a law except the body that issued it. Roman jurists also said, “The law is harsh, but it must be observed.” However, from the standpoint of humanism, one cannot agree that the world must collapse due to formal compliance with the law. Let's imagine a situation where a fire started at a secret military facility. By law, only people with special passes have access to the facility. So why not let the firefighters in?
It is not without reason that some human rights activists say that law is “legalized justice” and the law cannot violate a person’s natural gifts from birth, freedom. In my opinion, it is necessary to observe a certain compromise: in normal circumstances the law cannot be broken, but in a state of emergency, if we are talking about the destruction of the world, it is better for the law to perish.
If the understanding of justice in society changes, then the law must change. Thus, according to the famous Stalinist law “On Spikelets,” mothers with many children, whose husbands died in the war, went to prison for digging up a bucket of frozen potatoes in a collective farm field. To avoid such a choice: maintaining peace or observing the law, fair laws are needed, thought out by all branches of government.
44. “Who, having the opportunity to prevent a crime, does not
this, he helps him.” (Seneca)
I completely agree with the statement of the Roman philosopher. Indeed, a person who can prevent and avoid a crime and does not do so becomes an accomplice, an accomplice. Let's remember what a crime is.
This is a socially dangerous act encroaching on law and order, provided for

Criminal Code. The hallmarks of a crime are illegality, special social danger, guilt, and punishability. Under the expression
“socially dangerous act” is understood as a dangerous manifestation of deviant behavior that causes the greatest damage to society. However, an act refers not only to action, but also to inaction. For example, a person who robbed an apartment is certainly a criminal, but his friend, who knew about the robber’s intentions and did not try to stop him or report it to the police, can also be called a criminal. Or let’s take a car enthusiast whose car’s brakes are acting up. Knowing this, he drives onto the highway and, losing control, runs into a passerby. He is undoubtedly a criminal, although technical expertise may find him innocent. In order for there to be fewer crimes, a high level of legal culture of all citizens is necessary. After all, legal culture is not only knowledge of the laws and their strict observance, but also the desire to actively promote law and order and prevent crimes. Therefore, every citizen, knowing about an impending crime, is obliged to try to prevent it or report it to law enforcement agencies.
45. “By sparing criminals, they harm honest people” (Seneca)
The outstanding philosopher Seneca lived during the Roman Empire. What did he mean by this phrase? By not punishing criminals at all, or by not punishing them properly, we are harming honest, law-abiding citizens. And although many centuries have passed since then, Seneca’s words remain relevant. And I agree with his opinion, the essence of the crime remains the same. Who are the criminals? These are people who committed a crime.
According to the definition, a crime is a public act that encroaches on law and order, as provided for in the criminal code. The features of the crime are the illegality of the act, guilt, special social danger, and strict punishability. If the first two characteristics are true for any offense, then the last two are true for a crime. This suggests that if an offense can affect a person indirectly, then people face crime directly. Crimes can be classified: against the individual, against sexual integrity, against family and minors, in the economic sphere, planning and waging war, illegal production, storage and sale of narcotic drugs and others. Of course, all this harms people. Here we can focus on two aspects. Firstly, if the criminal is not punished, then criminal acts may be repeated. This is even the theme for films. Among the latest is the series “Deadly Force,” where a mother-judge covers for her son, who committed a robbery and killed two policemen. Their acquittal by the court prompted him to commit new crimes.
The second aspect of the problem is the victims. Seeing that the court cannot punish, many take the path of lynching. Here again we can remember