東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Budget arguments and military spendi...

Trotta, Anthony M.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Budget arguments and military spending in the immediate post-World War Two era.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Budget arguments and military spending in the immediate post-World War Two era./
作者:	Trotta, Anthony M.
面頁冊數:	319 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-09, Section: A, page: 3587.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International67-09A.
標題:	Political Science, Public Administration. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3234425
ISBN:	9780542880643

Budget arguments and military spending in the immediate post-World War Two era.
Trotta, Anthony M.

Budget arguments and military spending in the immediate post-World War Two era. - 319 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-09, Section: A, page: 3587.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Rutgers The State University of New Jersey - Newark, 2006.

Budgeting theorists have long recognized rational economic and traditional incremental approaches to describe budget allocations. Although rational economic and traditional budgeting can be useful in their respective ways, budgeting framed in either way ignores the political and administrative discourse over issues embedded in budget choices. Budget-centered studies fail to recognize how leaders decide fiscal issues by representing public opinion, conducting debate that includes knowledgeable people, and choosing a coherent and flexible course of action, in all, developing a budget with the context these leaders interpret. This study analyzes the influence of budget arguments on fiscal decisions by asking: (1) What budgeting arguments competed in the immediate post-World War II national security arena in the United States? (2) Which budget arguments won? (3) Why did the arguments win?

ISBN: 9780542880643Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017438
Political Science, Public Administration.

Budget arguments and military spending in the immediate post-World War Two era.
LDR:03269nmm 2200301 4500 001 1828689
005 20071024130534.5
008 130610s2006 eng d
020 $a 9780542880643
035 $a (UMI)AAI3234425
035 $a AAI3234425
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Trotta, Anthony M. $3 1917579
245 1 0 $a Budget arguments and military spending in the immediate post-World War Two era.
300 $a 319 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-09, Section: A, page: 3587.
500 $a Adviser: Gerald J. Miller.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Rutgers The State University of New Jersey - Newark, 2006.
520 $a Budgeting theorists have long recognized rational economic and traditional incremental approaches to describe budget allocations. Although rational economic and traditional budgeting can be useful in their respective ways, budgeting framed in either way ignores the political and administrative discourse over issues embedded in budget choices. Budget-centered studies fail to recognize how leaders decide fiscal issues by representing public opinion, conducting debate that includes knowledgeable people, and choosing a coherent and flexible course of action, in all, developing a budget with the context these leaders interpret. This study analyzes the influence of budget arguments on fiscal decisions by asking: (1) What budgeting arguments competed in the immediate post-World War II national security arena in the United States? (2) Which budget arguments won? (3) Why did the arguments win?
520 $a This research analyzed the major competing security arguments related to two post-World War II budgeting issues, demobilization of conventional forces and efforts to prevent the spread of atomic weapons. This study utilizes qualitative methods to determine why results differed from expectations. Data collection methods included: (1) analysis of key governmental speeches and treaties relating to national security, and (2) comparative analysis of the qualities of winning and losing arguments. This study improved on traditional document analysis, that are limited to simple word and phrase counting, by comparing contextual influences within budget arguments.
520 $a The findings indicate that the qualities of winning and losing budgeting arguments varied. The variance was a result of the strength of claims, the support, and in the more important warrants. The principle, reason and tradition framework is utilized to analyze warrants. The warrants make it possible for an argument to reflect important environmental data and are based on the work of philosopher John Locke. The more persuasive arguments highlighted the principle of national security and better addressed contextual issues within the political environment. The containment argument won out over isolationism, preemption and tariffs arguments. Limited proliferation was more convincing than the non-proliferation and unchecked proliferation arguments.
590 $a School code: 0461.
650 4 $a Political Science, Public Administration. $3 1017438
650 4 $a Military Studies. $3 1017606
690 $a 0617
690 $a 0750
710 2 0 $a Rutgers The State University of New Jersey - Newark. $3 1017745
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 67-09A.
790 1 0 $a Miller, Gerald J., $e advisor
790 $a 0461
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2006
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3234425