4º ESO - ¿Qué papel debe jugar el rey en la economía? / What roll should the king play in Economy?
A. Smith basó sus ideas económicas en la libertad, pero ¿qué papel debía jugar el rey? / A. Smith based his economic ideas on freedom, so what roll should the king play in Economy?
Hola soy Garoé Eduardo. El rey era la persona encargada de dirigir uno de los 3 poderes (ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial). Los cuidadanos son los más importantes para el rey porque que el poder viene desde abajo hacia arriba. Podía ser absolutista o parlamentista.
Hi I'm Garoé Eduardo. The king was the person responsible for leading one of the 3 powers (executive, legislative and judicial). The citizens are the most important for the king because power comes from the bottom up. It could be absolute or parlamentista.
To according with Adam Smith, the king should not have the three powers in his hand and only would that worry of the security of the town, the injustices and lead his citizens.
El rey solo debe de participar en uno de los tres poderes (el ejecutivo,el judicial o el legislativo), porque si fuera al contrario crecería la preocupación en las ciudades ya sea en injusticias, en seguridad,etc. Cada persona que no haga una injusticia puede ser libre para buscar su forma de vida o sus intereses para que puedan salir sus producciones a competir con la de otros individuos y el rey no puede hacer nada contra eso, ya que los tres poderes están repartidos y equilibrados
The king should only participate in one of the three powers (executive, judicial or legislative), because the worry grow in the cities either injustices, security, etc. Every person who does an injustice can be free to find their way of life or their interests so they can get their products to compete with other individuals and the king can do nothing against that, since all three powers are distributed and balanced.
Carmen Mena 4°C Acording to the system of free busines and economic the king has only to do 3 things: 1) protect the city 2) not do injustice with the people 3) keep public establishments Because the king can't have the three powers.. Because the power comes to down to up.. The citizent have rights too and if only one persona has the powers .. There aren't equality
Like the idea of Montesquieu (the separation of powers) : if the powers are in one person there are fear of the sovereign or the person, but if the three powers are separate and balanced there is freedom .The king must be part of one of the powers, should be for me the legislative power.
Hi! The roll that the king should play was to belong to a only power that conform a State ( the legislative, judicial and executive power). Also the sovereign had to protect the territory of the violence and invasion of other territories; control that the people belonging to the same nation aren't damaging in any way between them; and lead, for example, some public establishments. The idea of the king doesn't can concentrate the three powers also exist in the theory of Montesquieu that defend that the three powers must be balanced and separated to avoid the corruption, for example.
El rey era la persona encargada de dirigir uno de los 3 poderes (ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial). porque si fuera al contrario crecería la preocupación en las ciudades .Ya que los tres poderes están repartidos y equilibrados ,el rey no puede hacer nada contra las deciciones de los otros poderes.
-The king was the person responsible for leading one of the three powers ( executive, legislative and judicial) . because if the contrary grow .Ya concern in cities that the three powers are distributed and balanced, the king can do nothing against deciciones of the other branches .
El rey tiene que tener uno de los 3 poderes(Legislativo, Ejecutivo y Judicial). Si tuviera los tres poderes crecería la preocupación en las ciudades por eso los poderes estan equilibrados y repartidos.
Emilio Martel Díaz 4ºC En mi opinión el rey tiene que estar o puede participar en uno de los tres poderes( Judicial, Ejecutivo y Legislativo) para que estén repartidos equitativamente y equilibrados y así una sola persona no controle todo el sistema, que es el concepto que él defendía.
In my opinion the king has to be or can participate in one of the three powers (judicial, executive and legislative) so that they are distributed equitably and balanced, so one person doesn´t control the entire system, which is the concept that he defended.
The King must have power in one of the powers of government, not on the three powers because there would be equality. You must consider the citizens and that the citizens can have equal rights.
Creo que A.Smith defiende la idea del librecambismo siempre y cuando respete las leyes de la justicia, y en mi opinión creo que aunque esté de acuerdo con ello, el rey debería al menos proteger su sociedad de otras sociedades por invasión o violencia, evitar la injusticia y opresión de un miembro de una república a otro que lo sea también de la misma y mantener e instituir ciertas obras y establecimientos públicos.
I think that A.Smith defends the free trade idea as long as respect the laws of justice. And in my opinion I supposed that even if I according to these, the king could at least protect his society about other territories of invation or violence, also he avoid the injustice and oppression of one member of a republic to another which is from the same too. And finally he could keep and introduce some works and public institutions. But he must to have only one power because the powers should be separated and balanced.
- El rey tenía que tener uno de los tres poderes (Judicial, Ejecutivo o Legislativo) para tenerlos totalmente repartidos y equilibrados y así no solo el rey era el que tenía todos los derechos, sino que también los ciudadanos podían tener los mismos derechos.
- The king had to have one of the three powers (judicial, executive or legislative) to have them fully distributed and well balanced and not only the king was the one with all the rights, but also citizens could have the same rights.
-The sovereign only has 3 options: executive, judicial and legislative. This is intended to protect society from violence, injustice and maintain works and public establishments to keep social order itself.
-The sovereign only has 3 options: executive, judicial and legislative. This is intended to protect society from violence, injustice and maintain works and public establishments to keep social order itself.
Como la sociedad del antiguo régimen era de monarquía absoluta, es decir, que el rey concentraba a sí mismo los tres poderes, pues Adam Smith defendía de que el pueblo (ciudadanos), debían tener el poder y que los poderes; ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial no estuvieran concentrados en un misma persona sino separados y equilibrados teniendo el mismo poder unos que otros...
Como la sociedad del antiguo régimen era de monarquía absoluta, es decir, que el rey concentraba a sí mismo los tres poderes, pues Adam Smith defendía de que el pueblo (ciudadanos), debían tener el poder y que los poderes; ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial no estuvieran concentrados en un misma persona sino separados y equilibrados teniendo el mismo poder unos que otros...
Hola soy Garoé Eduardo.
ReplyDeleteEl rey era la persona encargada de dirigir uno de los 3 poderes (ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial). Los cuidadanos son los más importantes para el rey porque que el poder viene desde abajo hacia arriba. Podía ser absolutista o parlamentista.
Hi I'm Garoé Eduardo.
The king was the person responsible for leading one of the 3 powers (executive, legislative and judicial). The citizens are the most important for the king because power comes from the bottom up. It could be absolute or parlamentista.
Good job Garoé. Congrats.
DeleteTo according with Adam Smith, the king should not have the three powers in his hand and only would that worry of the security of the town, the injustices and lead his citizens.
ReplyDeleteNeither, because the king had three obligations and nothing about the economic.
ReplyDeleteNatalia Benítez Quesada,4ºC:
ReplyDeleteEl rey solo debe de participar en uno de los tres poderes (el ejecutivo,el judicial o el legislativo), porque si fuera al contrario crecería la preocupación en las ciudades ya sea en injusticias, en seguridad,etc.
Cada persona que no haga una injusticia puede ser libre para buscar su forma de vida o sus intereses para que puedan salir sus producciones a competir con la de otros individuos y el rey no puede hacer nada contra eso, ya que los tres poderes están repartidos y equilibrados
The king should only participate in one of the three powers (executive, judicial or legislative), because the worry grow in the cities either injustices, security, etc.
Every person who does an injustice can be free to find their way of life or their interests so they can get their products to compete with other individuals and the king can do nothing against that, since all three powers are distributed and balanced.
Carmen Mena 4°C
ReplyDeleteAcording to the system of free busines and economic the king has only to do 3 things:
1) protect the city
2) not do injustice with the people
3) keep public establishments
Because the king can't have the three powers.. Because the power comes to down to up.. The citizent have rights too and if only one persona has the powers .. There aren't equality
Person* sorry
DeleteLike the idea of Montesquieu (the separation of powers) : if the powers are in one person there are fear of the sovereign or the person, but if the three powers are separate and balanced there is freedom .The king must be part of one of the powers, should be for me the legislative power.
ReplyDeleteHi!
ReplyDeleteThe roll that the king should play was to belong to a only power that conform a State ( the legislative, judicial and executive power). Also the sovereign had to protect the territory of the violence and invasion of other territories; control that the people belonging to the same nation aren't damaging in any way between them; and lead, for example, some public establishments.
The idea of the king doesn't can concentrate the three powers also exist in the theory of Montesquieu that defend that the three powers must be balanced and separated to avoid the corruption, for example.
Hola soy Valeria Est. Nabatnikova
ReplyDeleteEl rey era la persona encargada de dirigir uno de los 3 poderes (ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial). porque si fuera al contrario crecería la preocupación en las ciudades .Ya que los tres poderes están repartidos y equilibrados ,el rey no puede hacer nada contra las deciciones de los otros poderes.
-The king was the person responsible for leading one of the three powers ( executive, legislative and judicial) . because if the contrary grow .Ya concern in cities that the three powers are distributed and balanced, the king can do nothing against deciciones of the other branches .
El rey tiene que tener uno de los 3 poderes(Legislativo, Ejecutivo y Judicial). Si tuviera los tres poderes crecería la preocupación en las ciudades por eso los poderes estan equilibrados y repartidos.
ReplyDeleteEmilio Martel Díaz 4ºC
ReplyDeleteEn mi opinión el rey tiene que estar o puede participar en uno de los tres poderes( Judicial, Ejecutivo y Legislativo) para que estén repartidos equitativamente y equilibrados y así una sola persona no controle todo el sistema, que es el concepto que él defendía.
In my opinion the king has to be or can participate in one of the three powers (judicial, executive and legislative) so that they are distributed equitably and balanced, so one person doesn´t control the entire system, which is the concept that he defended.
Lucía Viera Ruano
ReplyDeleteThe King must have power in one of the powers of government, not on the three powers because there would be equality.
You must consider the citizens and that the citizens can have equal rights.
Creo que A.Smith defiende la idea del librecambismo siempre y cuando respete las leyes de la justicia, y en mi opinión creo que aunque esté de acuerdo con ello, el rey debería al menos proteger su sociedad de otras sociedades por invasión o violencia, evitar la injusticia y opresión de un miembro de una república a otro que lo sea también de la misma y mantener e instituir ciertas obras y establecimientos públicos.
ReplyDeleteI think that A.Smith defends the free trade idea as long as respect the laws of justice. And in my opinion I supposed that even if I according to these, the king could at least protect his society about other territories of invation or violence, also he avoid the injustice and oppression of one member of a republic to another which is from the same too. And finally he could keep and introduce some works and public institutions. But he must to have only one power because the powers should be separated and balanced.
Maybe I didn't do it perfectly, but I did it.
Best regards Natalia.O
Ivonne Suárez Ramos 4ª B
ReplyDelete- El rey tenía que tener uno de los tres poderes (Judicial, Ejecutivo o Legislativo) para tenerlos totalmente repartidos y equilibrados y así no solo el rey era el que tenía todos los derechos, sino que también los ciudadanos podían tener los mismos derechos.
- The king had to have one of the three powers (judicial, executive or legislative) to have them fully distributed and well balanced and not only the king was the one with all the rights, but also citizens could have the same rights.
-The sovereign only has 3 options: executive, judicial and legislative. This is intended to protect society from violence, injustice and maintain works and public establishments to keep social order itself.
ReplyDeleteAlexia Martín Martín 4ºC
-The sovereign only has 3 options: executive, judicial and legislative. This is intended to protect society from violence, injustice and maintain works and public establishments to keep social order itself.
ReplyDeleteAlexia Martín Martín 4ºC
Como la sociedad del antiguo régimen era de monarquía absoluta, es decir, que el rey concentraba a sí mismo los tres poderes, pues Adam Smith defendía de que el pueblo (ciudadanos), debían tener el poder y que los poderes; ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial no estuvieran concentrados en un misma persona sino separados y equilibrados teniendo el mismo poder unos que otros...
ReplyDeleteComo la sociedad del antiguo régimen era de monarquía absoluta, es decir, que el rey concentraba a sí mismo los tres poderes, pues Adam Smith defendía de que el pueblo (ciudadanos), debían tener el poder y que los poderes; ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial no estuvieran concentrados en un misma persona sino separados y equilibrados teniendo el mismo poder unos que otros...
ReplyDelete