NationStates

Neo-Chicago wrote:OOC: No, the committee is punishing people for exploiting resources needed by poorer countries. Plus, the gnomes could agree with you? Who knows? You don't know what's going to sway these votes.

Clover spoke up "Yet you would deny these poorer countries the ability to undercut pricing and sell their products and resources, potentially improving their economic position? If a nation is poor, it is because they choose a poor path, usually involving socialism in some way, instead of building a strong economy first. Prices of resources are not the issue. I also note, as committees are slow to act and universal, it will make non-member nations infinitely more competitive on the world markets by easily undercutting the one-price WA. Our imports will skyrocket, our exports will stall completely.

You claim this does one thing, yet has far more unintended consequences you are ignoring or refusing to acknowledge. One shows inexperience, one shows deception or outright ignorance. Assuming the first is true, I would suggest that the nameless ambassador from Neo-Chicago may benefit from sitting in as an observer and participating in some debates before attempting to write international legislation. .

OOC: I'm just going to take an in character drink of scotch

IC: *Angela takes an in character drink of scotch*

Normlpeople wrote:

Neo-Chicago wrote:OOC: No, the committee is punishing people for exploiting resources needed by poorer countries. Plus, the gnomes could agree with you? Who knows? You don't know what's going to sway these votes.

Clover spoke up "Yet you would deny these poorer countries the ability to undercut pricing and sell their products and resources, potentially improving their economic position? If a nation is poor, it is because they choose a poor path, usually involving socialism in some way, instead of building a strong economy first. Prices of resources are not the issue. I also note, as committees are slow to act and universal, it will make non-member nations infinitely more competitive on the world markets by easily undercutting the one-price WA. Our imports will skyrocket, our exports will stall completely.

You claim this does one thing, yet has far more unintended consequences you are ignoring or refusing to acknowledge. One shows inexperience, one shows deception or outright ignorance. Assuming the first is true, I would suggest that the nameless ambassador from Neo-Chicago may benefit from sitting in as an observer and participating in some debates before attempting to write international legislation. .

OOC: Nameless? Ed Thompson, first page.

IC: Thompson chuckles. "Yes, but it will bring order to the economy. Member nations aren't forced to export or import, nor are they forced to export or import to certain people. The world market is not a competition. Plus, gasoline prices will drop with fairer pricing. Simply rely on domestic products, and increase the employment rate in your nation if you do not wish to participate."

Neo-Chicago wrote:OOC: Nameless? Ed Thompson, first page.

IC: Thompson chuckles. "Yes, but it will bring order to the economy. Member nations aren't forced to export or import, nor are they forced to export or import to certain people. The world market is not a competition. Plus, gasoline prices will drop with fairer pricing. Simply rely on domestic products, and increase the employment rate in your nation if you do not wish to participate."

OOC: May wanna put that into your sig or something..

IC: "There is no citizen in our nation unemployed who does not wish to be. Mandatory military service has benefits, not the least of which is not having to worry about security. As far as your examples and your rather blunt assertion that we should rely on domestic products, we largely do. In order to construct these products however, raw materials are needed. We like being able to negotiate pricing, and we also prefer to trade with WA nations being a part of it and all, but we will not be losing money to do so, as we would under this agreement.

Your assertion that the world market is not a competition is laughable and shows your lack of experience or understanding of the topic at hand. If we wish to export a product to another nation at a reduced and favorable price, we shall do so. Should a nation be unfriendly, we will raise prices on them. Such is the world market. There is no place for price-fixing schemes on he world market, regardless of whom is setting them. I would guess, that since you are defending this, that you will not listen to advice to drop it, so simply know that I will not be supporting it, and can pretty much guarantee its fall should the impossible happen and it somehow makes vote."

Normlpeople wrote:

Neo-Chicago wrote:OOC: Nameless? Ed Thompson, first page.

IC: Thompson chuckles. "Yes, but it will bring order to the economy. Member nations aren't forced to export or import, nor are they forced to export or import to certain people. The world market is not a competition. Plus, gasoline prices will drop with fairer pricing. Simply rely on domestic products, and increase the employment rate in your nation if you do not wish to participate."

OOC: May wanna put that into your sig or something..

IC: "There is no citizen in our nation unemployed who does not wish to be. Mandatory military service has benefits, not the least of which is not having to worry about security. As far as your examples and your rather blunt assertion that we should rely on domestic products, we largely do. In order to construct these products however, raw materials are needed. We like being able to negotiate pricing, and we also prefer to trade with WA nations being a part of it and all, but we will not be losing money to do so, as we would under this agreement.

Your assertion that the world market is not a competition is laughable and shows your lack of experience or understanding of the topic at hand. If we wish to export a product to another nation at a reduced and favorable price, we shall do so. Should a nation be unfriendly, we will raise prices on them. Such is the world market. There is no place for price-fixing schemes on he world market, regardless of whom is setting them. I would guess, that since you are defending this, that you will not listen to advice to drop it, so simply know that I will not be supporting it, and can pretty much guarantee its fall should the impossible happen and it somehow makes vote."

Even [most] nations with high government intervention in national economics recognize that price fixing is not to be trifled with. It breeds inefficiency.

OOC: This is so obviously not Free Trade. Price fixing is the exact opposite of removing economic barriers.

"I don't know why collision, coercion, and bribery are farcical. There are plenty nations here willing to do such a thing. Sounds like the start of another AO conspiracy, really. Opposed. I prefer free trade to mandated prices."

Gruenberg wrote:OOC: This is so obviously not Free Trade. Price fixing is the exact opposite of removing economic barriers.

OOC: Yeah, well there's very few categories to select from.

Neo-Chicago wrote:

Gruenberg wrote:OOC: This is so obviously not Free Trade. Price fixing is the exact opposite of removing economic barriers.

OOC: Yeah, well there's very few categories to select from.

OOC: unfortunately for you, what doesn't fit to a category can't really be legislated on. This would be illegal for category violation and removed if submitted.