Outline Research Paper
Outline Research Paper
Outline of research paper should consist of a short introduction with a good thesis statement. In addition, you should mention the research questions and set the direction of your research. Main body should be fully devoted to the topic coverage. It the part of the research paper in which you should include the main arguments and supporting evidence. Not every student is a good writer and not every writer is a good student. We know how difficult it is to write good research papers and would like to offer you a hand of help. Firstly, we have created a free research paper blog with over 300 sample written research papers (similar to the one below). Secondly, we hired 50 professional research paper writers to provide you with custom research papers 24/7. Our essay writers can write your research paper from scratch and in full accordance to requirements!
Outline Research Paper Sample
More important than these objections are the criticisms which attack public spending policy on economic grounds. One such argument asserts that public spending is economically wasteful. There are two general forms taken by the argument of waste: (1) that better results could have been obtained if the government had spent the money differently, and (2) better results would have been obtained by the private spending of the funds.
If the argument seeks to show that, as a nation, we could have had better results from the various spending programs, much of it can be granted. Certainly the broad program of public work could have yielded more concrete assets if organizational changes had been less frequent, if policy had been more stable, if the hand-to-mouth financial existence had been dropped for a more intelligent, long-term, well-planned program. The critics are in part correct if they mean that more physical goods should have been obtained for the money spent. No one familiar with the confusion of the early spending programs will deny this. However, some of the critics who argue in this manner overlook the fact that the primary object of some of the expenditures is not physical results. For example, the "productivity" of work relief is purposely curtailed by limiting the use of equipment and materials in order to give the maximum of employment. The technical efficiency of the projects is reduced in the endeavor to give jobs to the unemployed. By engineering criteria undoubtedly this is "wasteful", but engineering criteria are not decisive or wholly relevant for a program which subordinates technical efficiency to employment. Under these circumstances the question of waste depends largely upon the purpose. Work relief might be wasteful in the eyes of the engineer, but, on different grounds a technically efficient public works program might be viewed as wasteful by a relief administrator. In short, most of the criticism of waste applies the wrong criteria.
The waste objection often takes the second course, namely, that private spending of the money would yield better results. But the argument over the merits of public and private expenditure has relevance only in an economy of full employment, because it is only in such an economy that the issue is an either-or matter. On theoretical grounds there is nothing in either type of spending to commend it over the other, although the prevailing folklore invests the one with a greater aura of respectability.