No, democratically elected governments should not have unlimited power. Checks and balances, as well as a system of accountability, are essential to prevent the abuse of power and protect individual rights. Limitations on governmental authority help ensure that the rule of law is maintained and that diverse voices within society are heard and respected. Ultimately, a system of limited power fosters a more just and equitable society.
false
That which is specified in your local and national laws, and which wee promulgated by democratically elected representatives of the citizens.
I don't think there is any question that NO ONE likes and actually supports paying taxes.But all taxes are passed into law by democratically elected officials, using the Democratic process. So, the people have apparently democratically decided they want what the taxes provide.All governments tax, and always have. In a non-democratic one, the people have little of no say as to what the tax is for, how much it should be, etc.
The elected legislatures of the Federal, State and local governments.
The Social Contract
Because the "Powers that Were" were fugging stupid and should have taken a course in economics. ^Although the EU has caused many major economic problems and will continue to do so including the impending collapse of the ECB it is all the stupid democratically elected national governments faults. As we know it today it exists to create a single 'state of Europe', with authoritarian governance.
People often assume that a government elected by the people inherently represents the will of the majority, leading to the belief that it should have broad authority to enact policies and reforms. This perspective is rooted in the idea of democracy, where elected officials are accountable to their constituents. However, this assumption can overlook the importance of checks and balances, as even democratically elected governments can abuse power or neglect minority rights without established limits. Ultimately, safeguards are essential to prevent tyranny and ensure that the government remains responsive to all citizens, not just the majority.
Because he was legally and democratically elected twice, in 2008 and 2012; he received the most popular votes, and more than the required number of electoral votes. Of course, not everyone is happy with the results of every election, but President Obama was the person chosen by the voters and then re-elected, so a majority of Americans believed he should be the president.
In my opinion, as much as possible.
The idea that only freely elected governments should impose control on people is prominently explored in John Locke's "Two Treatises of Government," published in 1689. Locke argues that legitimate political authority derives from the consent of the governed, emphasizing the importance of individual rights and the social contract. This foundational concept has significantly influenced modern democratic thought and the belief in the necessity of representative governance.
Romney was not elected in 2012.
I think you can get. Well no sence to get unlimited, because everyone should call you a 'hacker' .