When we indicated the limits of the policy we understand what includes and therefore, we include/understand its definition, nevertheless the humanity is before the dilemma to find a consensus in reference to where are the limits. Other branches like those of the medicine exist and the architecture that has their delimited battle area or, clearly and defined, nevertheless the policy includes everything, its battle area is the entire world, from Alaska to the Polynesian islands all we comprised, in major or measured minor, of the extensive concept of policy. The policy is everywhere, is universal and in spite of it, not only by being it we have the same definition of the same exactly. Around the world, in the million universities educate that it, those professors of humanities exist all, each with its own definition, nevertheless that does not mean that they are all evil, is very complicated to create a definition that is not very vague but that it does not border on the end of the exactitude so that important data are omitted. The Real Academy Spanish defines to the policy as Art or draws up whereupon a subject is conducted or the average ones are used to reach an aim determinado2 but in the personnel, a so ample subject is very concise when imagining with the previous words, and even so minimalister definitions exist. We can call to the policy like the art of the good government as Aristotle and Plato did? He is then that. The good government is the result of carrying out a good policy? Foucault in his book of Gobernmentality assures to us that inquisitive ones with respect to the government exist three: the government of one same one, who corresponds to the personal conduct; the government of the souls and lives, who corresponds to the one of the religion and churches; and the government of the state.
It is not possible to be ignored serious the harassment political at general, that is to say own level of the policy, of the groups of being able dominant politicians, prevailing ideology, that generates effects in the political life of the country, like in the work, more when there are ideological discrepancies, positions granted by personal favors, political commitments, often without concerning the competitions, abilities, knowledge. All this, of not knowing how itself to handle brings about negative results, at level society, community, like an ominous organizational climate for the objectives, plans established by the company. In our case of greater interest the one of the companies, these do not have to allow that in their sine by political divergences conflicts are generated that to them long affect to him. It must be known how to ethically handle the political ideologies without allowing that these indicate and affect the productivity substantially. One knows that in the Venezuelan case that it concerns to us, for political reasons, where there is an iron division between the followers of government and the cons, the harassment is pronounced according to the interests of every one, until the end that originates unemployment, serious discrimination, affectations in the organizational behavior that affect the productivity. It is not possible to be only contracted those who get along with a certain ideology, is due to consider in priority, the knowledge, abilities, experience, skills of the professionals based on profits, of another form, pronounces itself what is constant in means, waste of talent, human capital. It is a certain fact, that the harassment political at general level has taken passage to protests, claims, reactions in order to avoid the injury of the rights to that he has each to dissent with others, so is the case of the woman, where, for example, the women town councillors of Bolivia impel a law that protect of the discrimination and the political harassment on the part of their even men, to who they attribute acts of intimidation and until threats of death, in particular in the countryside.
The case of California is the well-known more, by the importance that represents within the USA. Schwarzenegger, has been forced to apply to forts and unpopular cuts in the public cost, affecting to essential scopes of the call Been of Well-being, as they are them the expenses in education and in social services. The depth of the budgetary pocket causes that the cuts realised until the moment are insufficient and they must think about new reductions of expenses. Thus and everything, the government of California anticipates a public deficit among US$ 12,400 million and US$ 14,400 million in 2010. In order to graficar the seriousness of the financial problems in other states, the government of Arizona thinks about renting the building of the Congress to collect money, whereas in the state of Michigan already the diminution of expenses in schools and hospitals announced. The risk that exists around the necessity of a fort fits public prosecutor on the part of a great part of the S-states that the same adjustment finishes in this way bringing about a vicious circle within the economy and, that imposes a brake to the perspective of recovery of the economy of the USA. What must make the governors? The conflict of ideas is important. What appears like a seen better measurement is than the governments of the states in problems decide to trim their expenses to fit their balance public prosecutors.
The problem is that this decision can deepen the situation of economic recession with new negative effects on the collection. The alternative one happens to pospone all adjustment until the economy acquires force and it does not undergo too much with cuts in the expenses. For Susan Urahn, director of the Pew Center affirmed: the decisions that adopt those states while they try to leave in front of the recession will have a fundamental paper in what so fast all the nation will recover.