[DEFEATED] Repeal: Food Welfare Act

[Flibbleites]

So, Dr. Castro, you do not see the possibility of Nation A and Nation B being at war, and this war disrupting their agricultural production and Nation C (which may or may not be a WA nation) intercepting a Food Aid Shipment and then selling the foodstuffs on either market. Even below market prices in the nation they are selling to?

No, I do not see the possibility of World Assembly-owned, World Assembly-controlled, World Assembly-shipped and managed food aid being stolen and sold.

Why? Is there some sort of WA police or military force to stop it from happening?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Glen-Rhodes]

Why? Is there some sort of WA police or military force to stop it from happening?

One would assume that the World Assembly is capable of protecting its own international aid shipments. The idea that the World Assembly goes into places unprotected, with no safeguards whatsoever is so naive and so flat-out ridiculous that it's hard to entertain. Regardless, there is little to suggest that international aid would be stolen, even if all the World Assembly was equipped with was a minivan and some padlocks. It's certainly not ever going to happen on any significant level. And there's certainly no basis in the idea of free food being resold in a black market when, hey, guess what!, anybody can get that food for free in a crisis, when people are most likely to buy food through a black market, which isn't exactly a common phenomenon.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Monikian WA Mission]

One would assume that the World Assembly is capable of protecting its own international aid shipments

"It is the Monikian experience that assumptions aren't worth much.

The idea that the World Assembly goes into places unprotected, with no safeguards whatsoever is so naive and so flat-out ridiculous that it's hard to entertain

"Then who is doing this protecting? I know the non-existant WA military/police force isn't doing it.

Regardless, there is little to suggest that international aid would be stolen, even if all the World Assembly was equipped with was a minivan and some padlocks.

"On the contrary, container ships get hijacked all the time. What is naive and flat-out ridiculous is to expect that a container ship wouldn't be hijacked simply because it is flying a WA flag or has WA markings on its hull. After all there isn't a WA military to retaliate with after all.

It's certainly not ever going to happen on any significant level.

"Again container ships get hijacked all the time. Honestly criminals don't care who they steal from, they just want the stuff they are stealing. And even if it has happened just once, then it stands to reason that it will happen again. Significance plays no part in the fact that these aid ships are transporting a valuable commodity without protection. Looks like thats just inviting someone to steal something to me.

And there's certainly no basis in the idea of free food being resold in a black market

"First there is no such thing as free food. Someone had to produce that food, and I expect that they would have to be paid by someone for producing that food. Unless all the aid food comes from a WA slave colony just for producing aid food.

"Second stolen goods are regularly bought and sold across the multiverse. It doesn't matter if those stolen goods are bags of rice or some other commodity. If there is a demand, and the regular market can't supply it the black market will find a way to supply it. Thats how black markets work--although you've repeatedly demonstrated to not understand the most basic concepts behind black markets Dr. Castro.

anybody can get that food for free in a crisis

"Thats assuming that the container ships are not hijacked. And if they are sending more isn't going to solve the problem either...because those will be hijacked too. Furthermore there is nothing free in this multiverse--unless of course this aid food was produced by slave labor.

when people are most likely to buy food through a black market, which isn't exactly a common phenomenon.

"In most cases and in most situations people don't have to buy food through a black market. But should there be a famine, or the regular market break down...people will go to the black market. People need food regardless and they will get it one way or an other, regardless of whether that means buying on the black market, buying on the regular market or stealing it."

[Knootoss]

Upon the recommendation of the secretariat, weasel words have been added to our lamentation of the resolutions' unintended consequences. The Knootian World Assembly office has also decided to indulge the desire of the Unibotian delegation to see the most perfidious clauses of the original resolution mentioned in writing. Therefore, the repeal now explicitly mentions the clauses that we feel suck most:

RECOGNISES, however, that the problems of starvation and malnutrition are insufficiently addressed by this resolution:
1) Dumping food from prosperous Member States into recipient nations through the "surplus donation system" may drive local farmers out of business;
2) The IFWO does not provide any reason for the governments of recipient nations to reduce their dependency on food aid, leaving the system open to abuse;
3) The provision allowing governments to "seize food" from local farmers and from businesses may deter social enterprises from achieving community solutions;
4) The mandate of the ITA to "gradually reduce protectionist practices" and "manage trade issues" is broad and vague, preventing World Assembly from passing better trade legislation;

Congratulatory gift baskets may be delivered to my secretary.


Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

[Yuktova]

Why would you cut a thing like food welfare! It gives to the needy when they need it. Only a very evil, corporate slob would vote YES FOR REPEAL. I 100% disagree with this. I wish you a very unpleasant day.

[Knootoss]

Why would you cut a thing like food welfare! It gives to the needy when they need it. Only a very evil, corporate slob would vote YES FOR REPEAL. I 100% disagree with this. I wish you a very unpleasant day.

Well, and I think you are a....

The upbeat jingle from the 'Knootoss cares' publicity campaign begins to play at an ever-increasing volume. Aram frowns, and continues with a forced smile:

I agree with you that something ought to be done, but is this the right way to achieve it? This resolution may drive local farmers out of business and deter social enterprises from achieving community solutions. I still hope you have a nice day.

Peace,


Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

[Yuktova]

Sorry if I sounded a little mean in that post. I am just sick of Republicains though.

[Knootoss]

OOC: I am not a republican! Support this repeal please!

[Monikian WA Mission]

Sorry if I sounded a little mean in that post. I am just sick of Republicains though.

OOC: We don't have Republicans on NS unless thats a political party in some nation. I would vote for this and for the record I'm a Marxist. In the NS WA the division is more between National Sovereigntists and International Federalists. IE those that believes that the WA should only deal with international issues and those that believe the WA should micromanage every aspect of a nation's society.

Now while I would wish to do something for the poor, I think better alternatives are available to simply dumping food on their docks and leaving. Like for example creating something that would aid farmers directly, or lowering tariffs on food products and lowering food prices. As I said earlier before one of my smaller colonies (and by small I mean it takes up a small planet) could export over 5,000 metric tons of grain per day to any point in the known galaxy less than 1000 light years distant.

[Glen-Rhodes]

1) Dumping food from prosperous Member States into recipient nations through the "surplus donation system" may drive local farmers out of business;

This makes no logical sense. How are local farmers in business in the first place, when some kind of disaster has created a food crisis, which is the only time when the Food Welfare Act kicks in?

2) The IFWO does not provide any reason for the governments of recipient nations to reduce their dependency on food aid, leaving the system open to abuse;

What kind of proof or detailed argument do you have that outlines why a state would want to be dependent on crisis aid, instead of rebuilding their agricultural sector? This is a welfare queen argument. You are assuming, falsely, that food aid is equal to or better than having your own agricultural base.

3) The provision allowing governments to "seize food" from local farmers and from businesses may deter social enterprises from achieving community solutions;

How so?

4) The mandate of the ITA to "gradually reduce protectionist practices" and "manage trade issues" is broad and vague, preventing World Assembly from passing better trade legislation;

I think the repeal would be far more convincing if it focused on this. Although, "manage trade issues" is not part of the Food Welfare Act mandate. The full phrase there is "manage trade issues at the behest of the World Assembly." Alone, it doesn't do anything. That phrase is in there to encourage other people to use the ITA in their trade resolutions that would otherwise create a separate committee.

- Dr. B. Castro

OOC: We don't have Republicans on NS unless thats a political party in some nation. I would vote for this and for the record I'm a Marxist. In the NS WA the division is more between National Sovereigntists and International Federalists. IE those that believes that the WA should only deal with international issues and those that believe the WA should micromanage every aspect of a nation's society.

OOC: Please don't try and devolve this into some NatSov vs. IntFed fight. It's not. Humanitarian aid has been supported by NatSovs and IntFeds alike. Trade has always been a dicey subject, as well. There are NatSovs who oppose trade regulations -- including free trade -- altogether. There are IntFeds who believe that promoting free trade is beneficial.

[Bears Armed]

Upon the recommendation of the secretariat, weasel words have been added to our lamentation of the resolutions' unintended consequences.

"weasel words"? Such as, perhaps, "Cheese", "Cheddar", and "Wensleydale"... ?

[Knootoss]

The repeal has been submitted! Please endorse it here.


Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

[Glen-Rhodes]

The repeal has been submitted! Please endorse it here.

Unfortunately, you decided to include the errant passages and decided to ignore my suggestion to focus on trade issues, which is exactly what I said I would support. The bulk of this repeal is based on issues that objectively do not exist in the Food Welfare Act.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Knootoss]

Indeed. The errant passages have been included. I have strayed from the path you laid out for me.


Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

[Monikian WA Mission]

Indeed. The errant passages have been included. I have strayed from the path you laid out for me.

(Image)
Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

"Which is only reasonable since Dr. Castro has pretty much confirmed that he will oppose this repeal regardless."

[Glen-Rhodes]

Which is only reasonable since Dr. Castro has pretty much confirmed that he will oppose this repeal regardless.

On the contrary, I specifically said I would support a repeal that was based on trade issues. Knootoss decided to not focus on those issues, and instead decided to take a path that indulges in petty grievances and disinformation.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Monikian WA Mission]

Which is only reasonable since Dr. Castro has pretty much confirmed that he will oppose this repeal regardless.

On the contrary, I specifically said I would support a repeal that was based on trade issues. Knootoss decided to not focus on those issues, and instead decided to take a path that indulges in petty grievances and disinformation.

- Dr. B. Castro

"Or translated into what everyone really knows to be true. Dr. Castro is opposed because Ambassdor Koopman didn't stick to the agenda that he laid out to specificly cause the repeal to fail. Dr. Castro who do you think you are fooling? Us or Yourself?"

[Glen-Rhodes]

"Or translated into what everyone really knows to be true. Dr. Castro is opposed because Ambassdor Koopman didn't stick to the agenda that he laid out to specificly cause the repeal to fail. Dr. Castro who do you think you are fooling? Us or Yourself?"

If the repeal can only succeed by using FUD and disinformation, then perhaps that means somebody should be questioning why they submitted the repeal. A good economic argument can get the Food Welfare Act repealed. What I oppose is this blatant attempt at poisoning the well for a replacement.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Monikian WA Mission]

"If you oppose poisoning the well, then don't poison it. That said this repeal is not based on disinformation but very real circumstances that have or could arise out of the legislation to be repealed. The only one here interested in disinformation is you because you want to keep your precious safe from repeal."

[Knootoss]

Ahhh splendid. 46 approvals in, 26 more to go. Endorse, endorse, endorse!


Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

[Scandavian States]

OOC: This is the problem when you use 'specific events' in repeals, you need to prove their existence -- which you can't.

[The situation Knootoss puts forth is quantifiable by any sane economic model (i.e. NOT Socialist/Keynesian). Simply put, when a person is given something with no calculable cost to anything they identify with, there is no incentive to better their situation by engaging in productive economic activity. This resolution is Socialism at its worst and the reason for the existence of reactionary anti-UN/WA non-member organizations.

EDIT: This resolution has my unconditional support.]

[Parti Ouvrier]

The Food Welfare Act was built on reformist illusions. The repeal of this probably will not make much difference and we cannot see how a nation that has a food crisis will have the option of agricultural food subsidies open to them and the use of tariffs is contradictory for a nation,(Knootoss) that supports free trade.

We will abstain in the hope that an international NS version of Captain Swing will emerge. The WA cannot sort this problem out, the people on the other hand perhaps will.

CJ
Diplomat for the DRPO

[Monikian WA Mission]

The Food Welfare Act was built on reformist illusions. The repeal of this probably will not make much difference and we cannot see how a nation that has a food crisis will have the option of agricultural food subsidies open to them and the use of tariffs is contradictory for a nation,(Knootoss) that supports free trade.

We will abstain in the hope that an international NS version of Captain Swing will emerge. The WA cannot sort this problem out, the people on the other hand perhaps will.

CJ
Diplomat for the DRPO

"Perhaps with the repeal there might be room for the creation of a procedure for the government of nations undergoing a famine to request aid from member nations. Such aid can be protected by the military forces of the aiding nation, and both governments can assure that the food will get where it is needed and not end up on the stolen goods market.

"We know that if any nation requested food aid from Monkiah, we would indeed lend them support. Indeed I said earlier that one of a smaller outposts Vega III could supply 5,000 trillion metric tons of grain per day provided that the nation in question was less than 1000 light years distant."

[Unibot II]

The situation Knootoss puts forth is quantifiable by any sane economic model (i.e. NOT Socialist/Keynesian).

OOC: You lost your credibility for me when you declared Keynesian economics insane.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Perhaps with the repeal there might be room for the creation of a procedure for the government of nations undergoing a famine to request aid from member nations. Such aid can be protected by the military forces of the aiding nation, and both governments can assure that the food will get where it is needed and not end up on the stolen goods market.

... This makes no sense whatsoever. You are asserting that goods are being stolen in the case of IFWO. You are now saying that if we just transfer the responsibility to member states, everything will be fine and dandy. Apparently, you're assuming that the IFWO enters into a crisis situation with nothing but a minivan of food. This is false. Your argument is nonsensical.

- Dr. B. Castro