GRE 作文题目
来源于朗播用户：alex_338
[Claim] Major policy decisions should always be left to politicians and other government experts. [Reason] Politicians and other government experts are more informed and thus have better judgment and perspective than do members of the general public. [Specific Task Instruction: Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.]
题目分析
翻译
[观点] 主要的政策决定往往应该留给政治家和其他政府专家们。
[理由] 政治家和其他政府专家们相对公众来说见多识广，并且因此能有更好的判断力和看法。
[说明] 写一篇文章，讨论你同意或反对这个观点，以及支持观点的理由达到怎样的程度。
指导
本题改编自老GRE的ISSUE79"Major policy decisions should always be left to politicians and other government experts, who are more informed and thus have better judgment and perspective than do members of the general public"。题目讨论政策决定制定者的选择，题目认为从见识、判断力和看法角度，政治家和政府专家要比公众更适合。在分析的过程中，可以从二者的差异、对政策的影响和决定过程中起到的不同作用以及各自的优势与不足等方面展开思考。
写作思路 学会梳理作文思路--->上朗播网
1. 请列举三条有代表性的重大政策决定，并简述这些决定的制定者是谁。
回答：
胡佛 “自由放任”政策失败的原因
【突破】（1）胡佛的反危机措施：①经济大危机爆发后，胡佛政府继续奉行自由放任主义，让经济进行“自我治疗”，他反对政府干预经济，拒绝稳定股市的建议，否决国会的救济方案，他只要求工商界和劳工自愿组织起来，共同维持生产和投资，稳定工资和物价，并削减个人和公司所得税，以鼓励企业投资。1930年，胡佛政府大幅度提高关税，导致其他国家也纷纷高筑关税壁垒，加剧了世界性经济危机。②1932年是总统大选年，为赢得选举，胡佛被迫采取两大措施：一是成立复兴金融公司，向大银行、大企业、大农场提供货款，并允许复兴金融公司向各州发放货款，进行救济。二是签署紧急救济与工程建设法，扩大公共工程项目。但是，胡佛依然实行通货紧缩政策，削减政府开支，反对联邦政府进行救济。胡佛政府所采取的反危机措施犹如杯水车薪，最终没有实现制止危机的效果。
（2）胡佛反危机政策失败的根本原因是：①固守传统的“自由放任”政策，错误地认为资本主义经济制度是完美无缺的制度，自身可以进行调节，因而反对国家干预经济生活，鼓吹自由放任和自由竞争。但是自由放任造成的生产、流通、分配等领域内的无政府状态，使经济长期处于混乱、失衡的状况中，从而无法摆脱危机。②胡佛在三十年代大危机期间屡次否认危机的原因在于美国自身，而把危机说成是由于外部原因所致。如果认为危机的根源不在美国国内，胡佛也就绝不可能采取任何大的行动来改善和修补美国本身的经济制度，也绝不可能采取任何含有大变革意义的反危机措施；即使迫于恶劣的经济形势而采取了某些措施，也不可能真正治愈或战胜这场危机。这也是胡佛的反危机措施之所以不疼不痒、缩手缩脚，以至最终彻底失败的根本原因之一。
当时的种种迹象表明：这一失败绝不仅仅是胡佛个人的失败。胡佛干预经济的失败，正如他采取干预经济的政策一样，都标志了统治美国经济百年之久的放任主义政策的失败。统治了美国资本主义经济生活百年之久的古典放任主义经济理论已经无可挽回地衰落了，国家作为一种高踞于社会之上的力量对经济生活进行干预已经成为未来经济发展的必然趋势。资本主义经济生活中的一个时代结束了，新的时代即将开始。
一.独立宣言1776年7月4日由托马斯杰斐逊起草
二.1787年5月，美国各州（当时为13个）代表在费城(Philadelphia)召开制宪会议，同
年9月15日制宪会议通过《美利坚合众国宪法》。1789年3月4日，该宪法正式生效。
制定者是各州代表
三.美国权利法案，由詹姆斯麦迪逊起草，作为宪法关于权利保证的补充。
2. 政治家和其他政府专家在制定主要的政策决定的过程中有哪些优势和不足？请举例并简述。
回答：
明显优势：受过教育，更有远见能更好的制定决策。
不足：有主观政治倾向性，所做的决定不一定能对民众产生积极影响。
政治家和政府专家在制定过程中，因为其特定身份与专业知识与常人的差别，可以置
身事外较为可观，较为专业的理解制定政策所带来的正面和负面影响，并加以及时调整
平衡。不足是容易因特殊地位忽略漠视其他群体的感受，制定对自己群体有利的政策。
比如1787年美国宪法草案提交批准时，有些人提出了宪法无法保障人民基本权利的疑
虑。当时问世的7条正文，没有一条是保障公民人身自由与安全的人权条款）。对此，
支持宪法草案的联邦党人向美国人民保证，将会在第一届国会会期时在宪法中加入
权利法案。同时杰弗逊等人奔走呼吁，要求在宪法中增加包括信仰自由、出版自由、陪
审制度等人权条款。以保证“生命权、自由权和追求幸福之权” 于是美国权利法案诞生
3. 如果让公众去做政策决定，他们的决定和政治家的决定会有哪些差异？有哪些优点以及会出现的潜在问题？请举例并简述。
回答：
公众作决定，会更倾向于眼前利益，而不考虑国家的长治久安。
公众去做政策决定的话和政治家相比容易因为视野的不开阔，通常会更注意政策本身
对自己的影响却忽略对他人的影响，因而较为微观，政治家从全局通盘考虑，决定相
对宏观。比如在美国初期拥有奴隶是合法的，让一群奴隶主去制定法律的话，得出的
法律只会对蓄奴者有利，如果奴隶也有相应的议事权的话，这种局面是不可能存在的。
因而公民有参政议政的权利，舆论监督，让美国公民有拥有武器反抗暴政的权利就成
为美国公权被牢牢约束的基础
4. 政治家、政府专家与公众相比，判断力和观点看法在哪些方面有着何种程度的不同？请举例并简述。
回答：
政治家政府专家的判断力观点更具有专业性，他们更多的是从宏观的和专业角度看问
题，公众则更注重微观层面，因而作出的判断往往切实但却容易被利益左右。比如二
战丘吉尔面对一名建造飞机场出现的钉子户时，有人提议强行把钉子户赶跑。丘吉尔
说：我们为什么而战，难道不是为了保护他人身不被侵犯，财产不会被侵犯么？如果
我们把他赶跑，占有属于他的土地，那我们和纳粹何异？
5. 见识广、更好的判断力和看法在主要政策决定的过程中起到了哪些作用？请举例并简述。
回答：
见识的过程其实就是学习比较的过程，有了比较才会有对事物的全盘认识，制定政策才不会闭门造车，
有了更好的判断力，才能准确地把握政策的实质和关键。
美国权利法案的颁布执行就在于汲取孟德斯鸠的思想，这个可以做例子
把他三权分立的思想付诸实施
其他用户的回答
作文
Should politicians and other government experts always decide major policy? Someone believe so for the reason that politicicians and experts are highly educated and thus have better judgment and perspective. However, I concede that the consideration of politicians even the president of a country cannot be always correct, thus the consensus with government and its people will be useful to avoid the uncorrect policy.
Admittedly, I believe that the responsible and informed politicians of experts can be better decision-makers. When consider the feasibilty of a policy, this kind of politician is less easily interrupted by their own natural ideas and arbitery suggestion from others. Churchill as the Premise of Britain in World War II can help illuminate this consideration. When he was advised to occupy the citizen's habitat compulsurily to build military airport. He strongly disagree and say (I have paraphased here) that we would be in commen with Nazi, if we unreasonably take this actions. In conclusion, Because of the exist of the responsible and wise leaders, there is no worry for people to leave the major policy decision to them.
However, even the desicion maded by the president of a country may face the unfortune of failure. Nobody can precisely predict the outcome of a policy, especially in a fickle situation. Hoover, as the 31st President of the United States, once undertaken the laissez-faire policy which latter became one of the reasons of the Great Despression. Thus, politicians should not take all responsibilites to make every desicions.
Moreover, as far as I am concerned, the consideration of decisions may be influenced by the special statues of the experts. When someone is allowed to put some limitation into the law, he or she may inevitably consider the private benifit rather than the public's. Consider the first appearance of the U.S. Constitution. It even did not include a item that protect the freedom and safety of its civilians.
In conclusion, through politicians play a significant role in making policy decisions, without the help of general public no one can promise all decisions is absolutely correct. Thus, we should excessively highlight the role of politicians in making policy decisions.
Admittedly, I believe that the responsible and informed politicians of experts can be better decision-makers. When consider the feasibilty of a policy, this kind of politician is less easily interrupted by their own natural ideas and arbitery suggestion from others. Churchill as the Premise of Britain in World War II can help illuminate this consideration. When he was advised to occupy the citizen's habitat compulsurily to build military airport. He strongly disagree and say (I have paraphased here) that we would be in commen with Nazi, if we unreasonably take this actions. In conclusion, Because of the exist of the responsible and wise leaders, there is no worry for people to leave the major policy decision to them.
However, even the desicion maded by the president of a country may face the unfortune of failure. Nobody can precisely predict the outcome of a policy, especially in a fickle situation. Hoover, as the 31st President of the United States, once undertaken the laissez-faire policy which latter became one of the reasons of the Great Despression. Thus, politicians should not take all responsibilites to make every desicions.
Moreover, as far as I am concerned, the consideration of decisions may be influenced by the special statues of the experts. When someone is allowed to put some limitation into the law, he or she may inevitably consider the private benifit rather than the public's. Consider the first appearance of the U.S. Constitution. It even did not include a item that protect the freedom and safety of its civilians.
In conclusion, through politicians play a significant role in making policy decisions, without the help of general public no one can promise all decisions is absolutely correct. Thus, we should excessively highlight the role of politicians in making policy decisions.
举一反三如何书写地道作文--->上朗播网
1.
Some people trust their first impressions about a person's character because they believe these judg...
2.
The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contempo...
3.
The detailed description about crime will affect the people and cause many social problems. Some peo...
4.
People attend college or university for many different reasons (for example, new experiences, career...
5.
As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for the...