[DRAFT] International Energy Markets (IEM)

[Imperium Anglorum]

If you're so assured this is fine, move forward with it. The overwhelming opposition you've received can't possibly be indicative of anything. Clearly, your opposition is a rabble of backwards anarchocapitalist cavemen who can't get their own history straight and couldn't legislate their way out of a dirty plastic bag without your help.

Please, Sir, submit it. In fact, I dare you to submit it three times in a row.

[NoFrellsGiven]

The US doesn't have a nationalized grid. Thanks for playing, we have some lovely parting gifts for you.

That is another radically ill informed statement. The USA has a few Regional grids that are larger than most countries. Soon even these grids will be consolidated...

http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/document ... egions.jpg

[Separatist Peoples]

That is another radically ill informed statement. The USA has a few Regional grids that are larger than most countries. Soon even these grids will be consolidated...

http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/document ... egions.jpg

OOC: you claim the US has a national grid, then follow up with a claim that the regional grids will soon be, and are therefore not yet, consolidated. Get your bloody story straight.

[The Two Jerseys]

That is another radically ill informed statement. The USA has a few Regional grids that are larger than most countries. Soon even these grids will be consolidated...

http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/document ... egions.jpg

These regional grids are all run by nonprofit corporations; therefore, the grid is not nationalized.

[NoFrellsGiven]

Please, Sir, submit it. In fact, I dare you to submit it three times in a row.

Sure. How does a draft move forward. I think a WA delegate has to push it.

[NoFrellsGiven]

These regional grids are all run by nonprofit corporations; therefore, the grid is not nationalized.

The first interesting argument. But there is a fine line between nonprofit corporations and nationalization. And we are rambling way outside the scope of this resolution which will not nationalize the grid.

[The Two Jerseys]

These regional grids are all run by nonprofit corporations; therefore, the grid is not nationalized.

The first interesting argument. But there is a fine line between nonprofit corporations and nationalization.

How is there a fine line between private ownership and government ownership?

[NoFrellsGiven]

How is there a fine line between private ownership and government ownership?

You murdered the question. But to get back on track of the rant non profits are not taxed by the state which is a major endorsement by the state.

[The Two Jerseys]

How is there a fine line between private ownership and government ownership?

You murdered the question. But to get back on track of the rant non profits are not taxed by the state which is a major endorsement by the state.

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

[NoFrellsGiven]

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

Money speaks louder than words.

[The Two Jerseys]

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

Money speaks louder than words.

Then maybe money can do a better job explaining why this proposal is a good idea.

[NoFrellsGiven]

Then maybe money can do a better job explaining why this proposal is a good idea.

You failed to connect that non-profits are agents of the state because a significant portion of their economic comparative advantage are provided by the state. They don't pay their fair share of taxes. How much of an advantage would you have if you did not have to pay taxes while others had to pay the burden for defending this nation and keeping this society #1.

Anyway to continue.. why is this specific resolution a good idea?

Because it enables increased, unrestricted commerce between WA members.

[Wrapper]

International Energy Markets (IEM)

Category: Free Trade, Environmental

Well, which is it? Free Trade or Environmental? You can't have both.

Establishes an International Energy Transmission Fund (IETF) for each civilization tier:

The resolution does not define a "civilization tier".

The IETF will develop energy transmission capacity between nations within their current civilization tier.

How would the committee develop capacity?

Said destruction by the IETF project may also be prevented by a popular vote of the WA.

That sounds like a metagaming violation.

The IETF is to be funded by a fee on Energy Transactions made within the International Energy Market (IEM) for its civilization tier. The initial source of funding for the IETF will be a one time fee on each member state equal to 1% of this years GDP to be paid out annually over the next 5 years.

This is the exact opposite of Free Trade. You're imposing what amounts to a WA-sanctioned tariff.

The transmission of energy between all member states requires the exchange of all technologies for energy transmission with all member states within their civilization tier and higher.

We would argue against this concept... if we had any idea what it actually means.

The price of energy on the IEM will be reported on the smallest granular of time that current technology between member states allows.

So... we can measure time in nanoseconds. We should update the price of energy in nanoseconds? Why?

Have a board of directors represented by a delegate from each region within that board's civilization tier.

Pretty sure this is metagaming as well.

The delegate from each region will belong to the board's civilization tier and be selected by a popular vote every year by that regions leaders who belong to the respective board's civilization tier.

As is this.

The delegate will have voting power within the board by shares which total the number of nations in that region in the boards respective civilization tier.

And this. You can't force anything on regions or delegates; only on all member nations.

Exchange all demand response, energy transfer, energy efficiency, energy storage, and clean energy technologies with all member nations.

Ummm no we won't.

If a technology can be used to create a weapon of mass destruction, that technology is exempt from this recommendation.

Many propelled weapons of mass destruction require combustion to launch. Many also require electrical energy to release safety switches on their electromechanical fuzes, or use electrical detonators to start the chain reaction to set off the ordnance. Hey, guess combustion and electricity are exempt from this recommendation then, right?

[The Two Jerseys]

Then maybe money can do a better job explaining why this proposal is a good idea.

You failed to connect that non-profits are agents of the state because a significant portion of their economic comparative advantage are provided by the state. They don't pay their fair share of taxes. How much of an advantage would you have if you did not have to pay taxes.

Anyway to continue.. why is this specific resolution a good idea?

Because it enables increased, unrestricted commerce between WA members.

A WA monopoly over electrical transmission isn't unrestricted commerce.

[NoFrellsGiven]

International Energy Markets (IEM)

Category: Free Trade, Environmental

Well, which is it? Free Trade or Environmental? You can't have both.

> We can have both. Dream big.

Establishes an International Energy Transmission Fund (IETF) for each civilization tier:

> This would be a major point of collaboration. Please reference my previous post: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=349192&p=25436012&sid=b5d8ab38f7761f09a0e047097756f281#p25436012
I have been looking for the civlization reference. It is a back bone of the whole legislation.

The IETF will develop energy transmission capacity between nations within their current civilization tier.

How would the committee develop capacity?

> Capacity is added by new power lines. But I leave the interpretation open for sci fi tech. And possibly even oil pipelines.

Said destruction by the IETF project may also be prevented by a popular vote of the WA.

That sounds like a metagaming violation.

> Can you expand on this violation? Popular voting feels basic to the WA.

The IETF is to be funded by a fee on Energy Transactions made within the International Energy Market (IEM) for its civilization tier. The initial source of funding for the IETF will be a one time fee on each member state equal to 1% of this years GDP to be paid out annually over the next 5 years.

This is the exact opposite of Free Trade. You're imposing what amounts to a WA-sanctioned tariff.

> The tariff is a small transaction fee on the use of internationally funded transmission capacity. If you have a better suggestion I am all for it. But without such an agency the ability to buy/sell energy internationally will be severely limited.

The transmission of energy between all member states requires the exchange of all technologies for energy transmission with all member states within their civilization tier and higher.

We would argue against this concept... if we had any idea what it actually means.

> Transmission tech within a civilization tier trends to be universally discovered. Generating said energy is much more difficult. But explained about 12 times now, the exchange of said tech if not to open new discoveries but to merely open said interfaces enables the transfer of energy.

The price of energy on the IEM will be reported on the smallest granular of time that current technology between member states allows.

So... we can measure time in nanoseconds. We should update the price of energy in nanoseconds? Why?

> As explained previously, some energy providers are slow to respond to demand like old coal and old nuclear. They would prefer to use an yearly average electricity price to outbid other providers, though it would be an inaccurate estimation of costs.

The delegate from each region will belong to the board's civilization tier and be selected by a popular vote every year by that regions leaders who belong to the respective board's civilization tier.

As is this.

The delegate will have voting power within the board by shares which total the number of nations in that region in the boards respective civilization tier.

And this. You can't force anything on regions or delegates; only on all member nations.

> I dont think this is a meta game violation. This doesn't change how the leader is chosen. He can still be a despot.

Exchange all demand response, energy transfer, energy efficiency, energy storage, and clean energy technologies with all member nations.

Ummm no we won't.

> It was only a suggestion.

If a technology can be used to create a weapon of mass destruction, that technology is exempt from this recommendation.

Many propelled weapons of mass destruction require combustion to launch. Many also require electrical energy to release safety switches on their electromechanical fuzes, or use electrical detonators to start the chain reaction to set off the ordnance. Hey, guess combustion and electricity are exempt from this recommendation then, right?

> Excellent points. I was thinking of nuclear tech though combustion could also be dangerous. Which I encourage everyone to share, though i understand the security fear. But hey it only a suggestion.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Well, which is it? Free Trade or Environmental? You can't have both.

> We can have both. Dream big.

Not legally you can't. I dream big, a giant conflagration when this draft hits the fire.

> This would be a major point of collaboration. Please reference my previous post: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... #p25436012
I have been looking for the civlization reference. It is a back bone of the whole legislation.

Then you better write it into the resolution. Use the bloody URL tags and stop link spamming.

How would the committee develop capacity?

> Capacity is added by new power lines. But I leave the interpretation open for sci fi tech. And possibly even oil pipelines.

Who's going to pay for it?

This is the exact opposite of Free Trade. You're imposing what amounts to a WA-sanctioned tariff.

The tariff is a small transaction fee on the use of internationally funded transmission capacity. If you have a better suggestion I am all for it. But without such an agency the ability to buy/sell energy internationally will be severely limited.

I cannot support a tax on World Assembly nations (which, due to NEF and R&D, is illegal).

We would argue against this concept... if we had any idea what it actually means.

Transmission tech within a civilization tier trends to be universally discovered. Generating said energy is much more difficult. But explained about 12 times now, the exchange of said tech if not to open new discoveries but to merely open said interfaces enables the transfer of energy.

Define civilisation tier.

So... we can measure time in nanoseconds. We should update the price of energy in nanoseconds? Why?

As explained previously, some energy providers are slow to respond to demand like old coal and old nuclear. They would prefer to use an yearly average electricity price to outbid other providers, though it would be an inaccurate estimation of costs.

How does a smaller grain of time lead to better demand-response?

Pretty sure this is metagaming as well ... As is this ... And this ... You can't force anything on regions or delegates; only on all member nations.

I dont think this is a meta game violation. The doesn't change how the leader is chosen. He can still be a despot.

Doesn't matter what you think. It is still a meta-gaming violation. RTFM. Please, submit it and find out.

Ummm no we won't.

Fuck you.

Nice argumentative tactic there. I'm entirely convinced.

Many propelled weapons of mass destruction require combustion to launch. Many also require electrical energy to release safety switches on their electromechanical fuzes, or use electrical detonators to start the chain reaction to set off the ordnance. Hey, guess combustion and electricity are exempt from this recommendation then, right?

Excellent points. I was thinking of nuclear tech, wish i encourage everyone to share, though i understand the security fear. But hey it only a suggestion.

By suggestion, I presume you mean mandate? Because that's what is written here. Secondarily, your nation cannot share nuclear technologies with another nation. Doing so is a violation of the Nuclear Security Convention.

[NoFrellsGiven]

A WA monopoly over electrical transmission isn't unrestricted commerce.

The WA does not control electrical transmission. Electricity is auctioned off in the IEM. The only control over transmission is in the IETF in deciding what capacity to build next. Somebody has to decide this small step into the future whether its public or private or some abominational comibination thereof. Hopefully the right choice is made through the democratically elected board of the IETF. Do you have a better suggestion?

[Imperium Anglorum]

A WA monopoly over electrical transmission isn't unrestricted commerce.

The WA does not control electrical transmission. Electricity is auctioned off in the IEM. The only control over transmission is in the IETF in deciding what capacity to build next. Somebody has to decide this small step into the future whether its public or private or some abominational comibination thereof. Hopefully the right choice is made through the democratically elected board of the IETF. Do you have a better suggestion?

The IEM and the IETF are created by the World Assembly. Hence, the World Assembly is auctioning off electricity and the World Assembly is controlling transmission. Hence, that is a lie.

The 'democratically elected board of the IETF' you're speaking of is a meta-gaming violation. Please consult the Rules.

[Normlpeople]

OOC: We have Bitely 2 here. Since you dont seem to care that pretty much the entire thing is a metagaming violation, and you are ignoring valid criticism, I see no reason to give any. I will direct you to the rules/FAQ at the top of the forum, but I'd be willing to bet I'm wasting my breath there too.

Should you submit it... don't say you weren't warned about the illegalities in the.proposal.

[NoFrellsGiven]

The 'democratically elected board of the IETF' you're speaking of is a meta-gaming violation. Please consult the Rules.

I understand that metagaming is a catchall for reactionaries to claim any proposal that expands the NS universe violates the sanctity of NS. Which is a practical argument for actual programmers. And whether said resolution violates the functional coding of NS which I am sure is a difficult and thankless task, idk. But such "criticism" to come from a hopelessly uniformed ideologue as yourself, let me explain this clearly... i dont give a frell. Why are you in the WA if you expected to turn it into a dictatorship?

[The Two Jerseys]

The 'democratically elected board of the IETF' you're speaking of is a meta-gaming violation. Please consult the Rules.

I understand that metagaming is a catchall for reactionaries to claim any proposal that expands the NS universe violates the sanctity of NS. Which is a practical argument for actual programmers. And whether said resolution violates the functional coding of NS which I am sure is a difficult and thankless task, idk. But such "criticism" to come from a hopelessly uniformed ideologue as yourself, let me explain this clearly... i dont give a frell. Why are you in the WA if you expected to turn it into a dictatorship?

Stop spewing ideological bullshit and read the fucking rules already.

[NoFrellsGiven]

Stop spewing ideological bullshit and read the fucking rules already.

What is the violation and what is the solution. Hamstringing capitalism into a democratic institution such as the WA is the violation. By the way, this resolution is one of the MOST free market solutions that I ever heard of. It has simply been attacked for being suggested by a socialist, and reviewed by anarchists who hate anything good or bad designed by the big GOV.

[Wrapper]

I understand that metagaming is a catchall for reactionaries to claim any proposal that expands the NS universe violates the sanctity of NS.

Er... no, it's a violation of proposal rules. Submit a proposal that violates the metagaming rule, the moderators will pull it. Break the rules three times, and they kick you from the WA. Or we could just sit back and watch you fail, but no, we aren't like that, unless you give us some reason to....

> Fuck you. It was only a suggestion.

On second thought, fix your own proposal, we're outta here.

[The Two Jerseys]

Stop spewing ideological bullshit and read the fucking rules already.

What is the violation and what is the solution. Hamstringing capitalism into a democratic institution such as the WA is the violation.

You know what, just submit this right now. Keep on submitting it as long as it takes to get passed.

[Imperium Anglorum]

The 'democratically elected board of the IETF' you're speaking of is a meta-gaming violation. Please consult the Rules.

I understand that metagaming is a catchall for reactionaries to claim any proposal that expands the NS universe violates the sanctity of NS. Which is a practical argument for actual programmers. And whether said resolution violates the functional coding of NS which I am sure is a difficult and thankless task, idk. But such "criticism" to come from a hopelessly uniformed ideologue as yourself, let me explain this clearly... i dont give a frell. Why are you in the WA if you expected to turn it into a dictatorship?

RTFM. As Jersey summarised very eloquently: 'Stop spewing ideological bullshit and read the fucking rules already'. You seem to think that our telling you how your proposal violates the proposal rules is some sort of personal attack. Stop it already.

Stop spewing ideological bullshit and read the fucking rules already.

What is the violation and what is the solution. Hamstringing capitalism into a democratic institution such as the WA is the violation.

1. We are not here to write your proposal for you. If you want that, hire someone.
   
   
2. Capitalism is a protected ideology under World Assembly rules. You cannot ban ideologies in the World Assembly. Secondarily, since capitalism is the best way of running an economy, I don't see how this belief that capitalism and democracy are incompatible even arises. Sweden runs the ship of state rather well, thank you. Furthermore, the World Assembly is not an entirely democratic institution. Delegates get more votes. The Honourable Ambassador for Eluvatar has over 500. As Jersey said: 'Stop spewing ideological bullshit and read the fucking rules already'.

> Fuck you. It was only a suggestion.

On second thought, fix your own proposal, we're outta here.

I like this one much more, but duty demands...

hopelessly uniformed ideologue as yourself

No, never mind Dishonoured not-Excellent Ambassador, we'll be ignoring this one too.

What is the violation and what is the solution. Hamstringing capitalism into a democratic institution such as the WA is the violation.

You know what, just submit this right now. Keep on submitting it as long as it takes to get passed.

Not a bad plan. Please, Dishonourable not-Excellent Ambassador, submit this as many times as necessary.

OOC: We have Bitely 2 here.

Oh heavens, Normlpeople. It's actually worse than Bitely. At least Bitely had arguments which used English and didn't consist entirely of snarlwords.