[DEFEATED] Technology Investment Act

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:07 pm

The Technology Investment Act

Strength: Significant

Category: Free Trade

This act is designed to provide universal access to new technology for nations, corporations, and individuals.

DEFINES technology as any device or process that aids in the development of new processes or devices.

REALIZING that many developing nations and small corporations do not have the funds necessary to purchase new and innovative
technology or upgrade their existing technology.

WORRIED that many individuals residing in WA member-states do not have access to new and innovative technology due to cost.

ALSO WORRIED that many individuals do not have access to communications, media, and education related technology due to the governments under which they live.

UNDERSTANDING that both of these issues impede economic growth, stability, and trade between communities from flourishing in the nations of the World Assembly.

DEMANDS that ALL WA members must allow their citizens to use technology freely for peaceful and harmless purposes as they please with as little government interference as possible.

INSTRUCTS ALL WA members to provide, within reason, citizens, corporations, and inter-governmental agencies with the technology necessary for improving speed and quality of work, communication, travel, and learning.

REQUIRES member-state analysts to truthfully provide information on the freedom and quality of technology in their respective member-states.

ESTABLISHES a Technological Freedom and Development Committee to

a). Assist corporations, individuals, and nations with monetary assistance in the form of both loans and grants so that they can upgrade, buy, or develop technology.

b). Monitor the freedom of technological use (especially in regards to communications and media) in member states.

c). Develop and bargain payment plans for technological investment with individual member-states.

d). Supervise and negotiate loans between banks, nations, and corporations for the advancement of technology.

MANDATES nations or corporations that ask for loans or grants or other assistance from the General Fund, banks, or other nations to have valid proof from analysts that their technology is insufficient in serving citizens, officials, workers, costumers, etc.

The Technology Investment Act

BACKGROUND: This act is designed to increase funding, improve, and provide universal access to technology.
DEFINITION: Technology is defined by this act any device or process that helps people perform work or create other processes or objects.

REALIZING that the development of new and efficient technology is vital to the success of the economies of the WA member-states,
ALSO REALIZING that access to technology must improve so that economies can develop and flourish,
KNOWING that many nations and corporations do not have the funds necessary to upgrade and improve the technology they rely upon,
ALSO KNOWING that the General Fund can be used to help nations to invest in new technology and industries based upon that technology and provide universal access to technology,
UNDERSTANDING that investment in technology can promote business opportunities, sustainibility, and democratic freedoms,

Hereby declares,
i. A Technology Council be established to determine where monies from the General Fund can be used to upgrade and improve technology.
ii. "Where" can be both nations and corporations.
iii. The Technology Council will target nations and businesses with outdated technology or nations and businesses who do not have the funds necessary to improve their technology.
iv. The form of funding given to these organizations can be in the forms of loans or grants.
v. Nations or corporations with large surpluses shall be required to be responsible for a larger amount of funding than nations with smaller surpluses.
vi. The Technology Council has the right to develop ways of safe-guarding monies of the General Fund from nations and corporations who want to abuse these monies.
vii. The Technology Council shall promote and encourage nations to invest in improving internet access and investing in communications and corporations to invest in environmental technology and processes that will reduce costs for those corporations.
viii. This Council will also fund development of hi-tech industries and corporations.
ix. This Council will also have the responsibility of ensuring that citizens have the rights to use different forms of technology in their nation which include (but are not limited to): Computers, phones, PDAs, TVs, Radios, and the internet access associated with some of these technologies.

by **Aeolic** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:11 pm

Well, where is the proposal?

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:13 pm

Its called a "concept" that means it hasnt been written yet...I was wondering if anyone would be interested in helping me write and/or support a proposal for investment in technology for nations lacking in this area or for nations who wish to "upgrade".

by **Sionis Prioratus** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:24 pm

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:25 pm

What category would this act be in??...also. Ok...I will write it up.

by **Cerberion** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:27 pm

I'll look forward to reading it.

I think there might be a cry against expense but we'll see what you come up with.

C

by **Droskianishk** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:50 pm

]

I understand this is a concept but here are some issues I already forsee being problematic.

An act to use the general fund to promote technological development and universal access to technology

I'm not sure what 'Universal access' means? I would be careful not to violate intellectual property rights (patents).

and would reduce paperwork and bureacracy in both the public and private sector

Paperwork might be reduced since I assume this would partially be an attempt to transfer records and other forms of 'paper' to a digital form, however you would be creating a whole new sector of bureacracy.

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:00 pm

The Technology Investment Act

BACKGROUND: This act is designed to increase funding, improve, and provide universal access to technology.

REALIZING that the development of new and efficient technology is vital to the success of the economies of the WA member-states,
ALSO REALIZING that access to technology must improve so that economies can develop and flourish,
KNOWING that many nations and corporations do not have the funds necessary to upgrade and improve the technology they rely upon,
ALSO KNOWING that the General Fund can be used to help nations to invest in new technology and industries based upon that technology and provide universal access to technology,
UNDERSTANDING that investment in technology can promote business opportunities, sustainibility, and democratic freedoms,

Hereby declares,
i. A Technology Council be established to determine where monies from the General Fund can be used to upgrade and improve technology.
ii. "Where" can be both nations and corporations.
iii. The Technology Council will target nations and businesses with outdated technology or nations and businesses who do not have the funds necessary to improve their technology.
iv. The form of funding given to these organizations can be in the forms of loans or grants.
v. Nations or corporations with large surpluses shall be required to be responsible for a larger amount of funding than nations with smaller surpluses.
vi. The Technology Council has the right to develop ways of safe-guarding monies of the General Fund from nations and corporations who want to abuse these monies.
vii. The Technology Council shall promote and encourage nations to invest in improving internet access and investing in communications and corporations to invest in environmental technology and processes that will reduce costs for those corporations.
viii. This Council will also fund development of hi-tech industries and corporations.
ix. This Council will also have the responsibility of ensuring that citizens have the rights to use different forms of technology in their nation which include (but are not limited to): Computers, phones, PDAs, TVs, Radios, and the internet access associated with some of these technologies.

by **Baptovia** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:54 pm

I like the concept. It does need sprucing up some, though.
Can't decide whether this should be "significant" or "mild" and really can't decide what the category should be.

EDIT: Try Significant and indicate that the improved technology will increase a nation's ability to partake in free trade with other, more technologically advanced nations. Then you could put it under "Free Trade".

Does this help at all?

by **Flibbleites** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:30 pm

The Left-Libertarian Hippies wrote:What category would this act be in??...also. Ok...I will write it up.

The smart thing to do is figure out the category before you write the proposal. It's much easier to write a proposal to fit a category than it is to try and shoehorn an already written proposal into a category.

Bob Flibble
WA Represetative

by **Separatist Peoples** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:57 pm

Alright, lets whip out the red pen...

The Left-Libertarian Hippies wrote:The Technology Investment Act

BACKGROUND: This act is designed to increase funding, improve, and provide universal access to technology.

Ok...

REALIZING that the development of new and efficient technology is vital to the success of the economies of the WA member-states,
ALSO REALIZING that access to technology must improve so that economies can develop and flourish,

Alright, I'll give you that...

KNOWING that many nations and corporations do not have the funds necessary to upgrade and improve the technology they rely upon,

Correct.

ALSO KNOWING that the General Fund can be used to help nations to invest in new technology and industries based upon that technology and provide universal access to technology,

Which sounds to me like a gross misappropriation of the General Fund, which is in place to fund the attempt to protect the people, not jump-start national economies.

UNDERSTANDING that investment in technology can promote business opportunities, sustainibility, and democratic freedoms,

Well, it certainly helps.

Hereby declares,
i. A Technology Council be established to determine where monies from the General Fund can be used to upgrade and improve technology.

Again, misappropriation of funds...

ii. "Where" can be both nations and corporations.

Ok.

iii. The Technology Council will target nations and businesses with outdated technology or nations and businesses who do not have the funds necessary to improve their technology.
iv. The form of funding given to these organizations can be in the forms of loans or grants.

Nations exist within a multiverse, which means all levels of technology exist. That creates some massive issues here, causing the proposal to be almost unworkable.

v. Nations or corporations with large surpluses shall be required to be responsible for a larger amount of funding than nations with smaller surpluses.

Wealth redistribution. This clause alone would condemn this proposal in our eyes, no matter what the rest of the proposal read.

vi. The Technology Council has the right to develop ways of safe-guarding monies of the General Fund from nations and corporations who want to abuse these monies.

Does the General Fund not already protect itself? I thought that was the job of the committee gnomes.

vii. The Technology Council shall promote and encourage nations to invest in improving internet access and investing in communications and corporations to invest in environmental technology and processes that will reduce costs for those corporations.

With language like this, this should be Mild, not Significant.

viii. This Council will also fund development of hi-tech industries and corporations.

I thought they were capable of that in the first place?

ix. This Council will also have the responsibility of ensuring that citizens have the rights to use different forms of technology in their nation which include (but are not limited to): Computers, phones, PDAs, TVs, Radios, and the internet access associated with some of these technologies.

Ok.

Overall, our opinion of this is that it is massively difficult to enforce. It attempts to enforce what feels like a "every member state needs to share technology" state. It would be workable if every Member nation worked in the same time period, but they do not. Additionally, there is the problem of copyrights and patents to address, which would render this bill nearly toothless, as most, if not all, of the technology would be patented.

For any one of the issues, you'd receive a resounding opposed.

by **Aeolic** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:08 pm

The ambassador strides in with a cool-serene face.

The council of Aeolic that the share of technology is impurgnent in increase of trade and such. Yet, forcing third world countries to 1st world countries is a dangerous thing to do. That is why we may be in support of this yet the dangers will be problematic.

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:15 pm

Im not forcing nations to upgrade technology...this is voluntary (its in the act)..also the costs of this wont drain the General Fund like some have said it would...Most nations will have the ask this committee for a loan and not a grant.

by **Aeolic** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:22 pm

The Council of Aeolic sees the applications of this proposal and sees the good it can create.

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:27 pm

Great, please give recommendations for what I need to change, if u think I need to change things.

by **Cerberion** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:29 pm

Some general observations.

This is a more middle of the road proposal so It's not putting my back up quite as quickly as some of the others I've seen lately. I don't like the wealth redistribution aspect much unless contributions are entirely voluntary.

The the word technology means many things to many nations, it seems plausible that the WA would know about most if not all of them and be able to help nations based on their current level and help them progress to the next level.

OOC though this in turn makes me go all Star Trek and scream Prime Directive!

This might be made workable if it's cleaned up some and turned mild.

OOC: Though the Prime Directive argument might be interesting to discuss, should the WA try and accelerate a nations natural technological level?

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:33 pm

Helping poorer nations over wealthier nations isnt redistribution...its fairness. If you have the funds to pay for updating technology you should pay for it yourself...if you dont have the funds then you should recieve help. If you dont like that, then I guess almost everything in your nation that concerns social justice doesnt exist, maybe even charity is banned? :eyebrow:

...anyway, this program is very voluntary and does force many nations to pay back funds they are loaned. Technology has to be defined for this act....

by **Cerberion** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:56 pm

The Left-Libertarian Hippies wrote:Helping poorer nations over wealthier nations isnt redistribution...its fairness. If you have the funds to pay for updating technology you should pay for it yourself...if you dont have the funds then you should recieve help. If you dont like that, then I guess almost everything in your nation that concerns social justice doesnt exist, maybe even charity is banned? :eyebrow: ...anyway, this program is very voluntary and does force many nations to pay back funds they are loaned. Technology has to be defined for this act....

Here we go again. Why on earth should I invest my hard earned in a nation that can't be bothered to get off it's bum and sort itself out?

My Nation didn't become economically powerful with help.

Mandated charity is not charity. It's called tax.

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:59 pm

Because that nation doesnt have the resources to help itself...im not saying they should be lazy...im saying that charity mandated or not promotes equality and is a good thing.

by **Separatist Peoples** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:07 pm

The Left-Libertarian Hippies wrote:Im not forcing nations to upgrade technology...this is voluntary (its in the act)..also the costs of this wont drain the General Fund like some have said it would...Most nations will have the ask this committee for a loan and not a grant.

If it is voluntary, I think the act is illegal for optionality. And just because charity is a good thing doesn't mean that forced donations aren't just another way of saying tax. And this representative doesn't get why nations should have to prop up developing nations through technological advancement.

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:12 pm

Voluntary meaning this doesnt force nations to update technology...that doesnt make it illegal :eyebrow:

...We should aid developing nations because they cant help themselves...i dont know why this rugged lassiez-faire attitude is so popular on NS :palm:

by **Separatist Peoples** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:14 pm

Because it means that nations that want to keep their nations laissez faire can, and that nations that want to legislate can do so as well. By keeping the WA as hands-off as possible, we can address serious issues without infringing on member's rights to run their country the way they see fit. How is this difficult to understand?

And yes, an optionality clause is illegal. However, I don't know for sure if it makes your proposal entirely illegal.

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:16 pm

No...I dont understanding why youre making a big deal out of nations not having to update their technology... :blink:

...anyway, if youre comming at this from a NatSov attitude we probably wont be able to actually come to an agreement on anything.

by **Separatist Peoples** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:22 pm

The Left-Libertarian Hippies wrote:No...I dont understanding why youre making a big deal out of nations not having to update their technology... ...anyway, if youre comming at this from a NatSov attitude we probably wont be able to actually come to an agreement on anything.

I refer you to my above post for the second part of this tripe. As for the first, in the NS multiverse what you're trying to do is simply too hard to do without messing up how nations function. Its in NO way a matter of NatSov or IntFed. Are you going to mandate that MT nations have access to warp travel or plasma weapons?

by **The Left-Libertarian Hippies** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:26 pm

No, not directly...but if they desire to, want funding to, and they actually need it...then yes we should provide funding...and thats exactly where ur coming from on this, so dont try to act "neutral".

[DEFEATED] Technology Investment Act

[DEFEATED] Technology Investment Act

Who is online