Ralph Said:

A 3 page report by Paulson, Bernanke how WE should deal with a trillion dollar bailout?

We Answered:

Actually we need to go into a depression. The banks that fail need to fail. In 1929 the market went south it took the banks 3 more years to go down. With our current fiat money system our dollar is doomed to begin with. Eventually it will catch up with us and the physical law of the market will take rule. Price fixing and bailouts will only add fuel to the fire.
Think about this. I hear people talk about the deregulation of the banks as being the cause. I think they are off a few decades. Actually you need to go back to 1913 and the Federal Reserve Act. It was a hijacking of the nation’s financial institution and put them and us at the will of a few very wealthy Europeans. People really need to read there history rather than listen to what some football coach taught them in high school history.
Then in 1971 we totally went away from any sort of hard currency. We went to the Federal Reserve Note. What guarantees its value? Nothing. Well you can only create something from nothing for so long before it devalues. To put it another way, what has more value, cardboard or a diamond? You see the cardboard is cheaper because it is easier to produce while a diamond takes years to form. Cardboard is much more plentiful than a diamond. Our dollar is not even worth as much as cardboard!
Same thing goes for our money. I’ll explain.
First off, where is the money going to come from? Taxes? Well, in a sense yes, but not right away. Let’s say that the government needs a billion dollars. They ask the Federal Reserve (a private institution) for a loan. Bankers are willing to deliver $1 billion in money or credit to the Federal Government only in exchange for the Government's agreement to pay it back — with interest! The Congress then authorizes the Treasury Department to print $1 billion in U.S. bonds, which are then delivered to the Federal Reserve Bankers. The Federal Reserve then pays the cost of printing the $1 billion (about $1,000), and makes the exchange. The Government then uses the money to pay its obligations. To top it all off the fed is then allowed to create 15 billion more to loan out with interest. All for only a thousand dollar cost to the fed.
Welcome to modern day slavery.

Jessie Said:

Is it okay for my daughter to have a Quincinera even if she isn't Latina?

We Answered:

if she wants one...let her have one...dont let cultures get in the way of you happiness......................bless you and your daughter...........let her have the best 15 b-day ever

Jay Said:

Writing a report for work regarding public schools can anyone help me.?

We Answered:

I'm betting the website of your local school board/district/authority will have this information or a contact you could ask.

Sheila Said:

Details about abuse? Im writing a report on it for English class?

We Answered:

Google is your friend.

Judith Said:

Writing a report about kids in prison/juvie any help? need some devils advocates as well as support?

We Answered:

Sorry, this is necessarily long...

1) A comment: Your focus only seems to be on the "rehabilitation" rationale of punishment/ juvenile hall.

However, legal scholars generally recognize several other rationales for punishment, and some have nothing to do with prevention of future crime.

2) the below is a detailed explanation taken from an article at the link below.


Theories of punishment can be divided into two general philosophies: utilitarian and retributive. The utilitarian theory of punishment seeks to punish offenders to discourage, or "deter," future wrongdoing. The retributive theory seeks to punish offenders because they deserve to be punished.

Under the utilitarian philosophy, laws should be used to maximize the happiness of society. Because crime and punishment are inconsistent with happiness, they should be kept to a minimum. Utilitarians understand that a crime-free society does not exist, but they endeavor to inflict only as much punishment as is required to prevent future crimes.

The utilitarian theory is "consequentialist" in nature. It recognizes that punishment has consequences for both the offender and society and holds that the total good produced by the punishment should exceed the total evil. In other words, punishment should not be unlimited. One illustration of consequentialism in punishment is the release of a prison inmate suffering from a debilitating illness. If the prisoner's death is imminent, society is not served by his continued confinement because he is no longer capable of committing crimes.

Under the utilitarian philosophy, laws that specify punishment for criminal conduct should be designed to deter future criminal conduct. Deterrence operates on a specific and a general level. General deterrence means that the punishment should prevent other people from committing criminal acts. The punishment serves as an example to the rest of society, and it puts others on notice that criminal behavior will be punished.

Specific deterrence means that the punishment should prevent the same person from committing crimes. Specific deterrence works in two ways. First, an offender may be put in jail or prison to physically prevent her from committing another crime for a specified period. Second, this incapacitation is designed to be so unpleasant that it will discourage the offender from repeating her criminal behavior.

Rehabilitation is another utilitarian rationale for punishment. The goal of rehabilitation is to prevent future crime by giving offenders the ability to succeed within the confines of the law. Rehabilitative measures for criminal offenders usually include treatment for afflictions such as mental illness, chemical dependency, and chronic violent behavior. Rehabilitation also includes the use of educational programs that give offenders the knowledge and skills needed to compete in the job market.

The counterpart to the utilitarian theory of punishment is the retributive theory. Under this theory, offenders are punished for criminal behavior because they deserve punishment. Criminal behavior upsets the peaceful balance of society, and punishment helps to restore the balance.

The retributive theory focuses on the crime itself as the reason for imposing punishment. Where the utilitarian theory looks forward by basing punishment on social benefits, the retributive theory looks backward at the transgression as the basis for punishment.

According to the retributivist, human beings have free will and are capable of making rational decisions. An offender who is insane or otherwise incompetent should not be punished. However, a person who makes a conscious choice to upset the balance of society should be punished.

There are different moral bases for retribution. To many retributivists, punishment is justified as a form of vengeance: wrongdoers should be forced to suffer because they have forced others to suffer. This ancient principle was expressed succinctly in the Old Testament of the Judeo-Christian Bible: "When a man causes a disfigurement in his neighbour … it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth…."

To other theorists, retribution against a wrongdoer is justified to protect the legitimate rights of both society and the offender. Society shows its respect for the free will of the wrongdoer through punishment. Punishment shows respect for the wrongdoer because it allows an offender to pay the debt to society and then return to society, theoretically free of guilt and stigma.

A third major rationale for punishment is denunciation. Under the denunciation theory, punishment should be an expression of societal condemnation. The denunciation theory is a hybrid of Utilitarianism and retribution. It is utilitarian because the prospect of being publicly denounced serves as a deterrent. Denunciation is likewise retributive because it promotes the idea that offenders deserve to be punished.

The U.S. co