NationStates

In a thick country accent, the ambassador speaks: "I don't need sum govahment body tellin' mah nation 'ow to control its envahroment".

Zakuvia wrote:"After deliberation in the Senate, I am announcing that the Empire will not support the WHAMMO legislation. While we understand the gesture of environmentalism, and in full recognition that this will put us on the side of those forces profiteering from the planet's destruction, we cannot in good faith support half-measures. No amount of tokens, credits, transferable or otherwise, will restore lost wetlands ruined by industrial encroachment and pollution. All the 'best practices' in the world mean nothing if all it takes to circumvent them is a meaningless 'sin tax'. Though this vote is largely ceremonial, considering the overwhelming support it already has, even within the DSA, the Empire must stand firm in its convictions."

- Legate Alrig Durmer

"A full ban on wetland damage will actually cripple industry, ambassador."

Tarsonis wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:

"You pay money based on the environmental value of the wetland for impacts that are unavoidable. That money goes back to WAMMO to fund it. This serves as an economic incentive to use less invasive methods while also funding conservation efforts."

.

"So,..is it a tax?...or a fine?

My only issue that it's not very clear how this is supposed to operate. Do we basically buy the rights to fill in a bayou?"

"Sure. Lets call it a fine. I suppose its a bit more like purchasing a permit."

Lolz and Civfive wrote:In a thick country accent, the ambassador speaks: "I don't need sum govahment body tellin' mah nation 'ow to control its envahroment".

"The WA is like a post-scarcity society: 'Need' isn't a concern at all!"

To be clear, WHAMMO is not an international police force, despite the enforce clause, correct?

Aclion wrote:To be clear, WHAMMO is not an international police force, despite the enforce clause, correct?

OOC: Not according to the rest of GenSec, clearly.

"I've been informed I've left somebody important out of my acknowledgements:

Ransium wrote:Big money... no whammies... STOP!

Anyway, surprising no one, we have voted for. Long live mangroves!

"My man!"

Separatist Peoples wrote:

Zakuvia wrote:"After deliberation in the Senate, I am announcing that the Empire will not support the WHAMMO legislation. While we understand the gesture of environmentalism, and in full recognition that this will put us on the side of those forces profiteering from the planet's destruction, we cannot in good faith support half-measures. No amount of tokens, credits, transferable or otherwise, will restore lost wetlands ruined by industrial encroachment and pollution. All the 'best practices' in the world mean nothing if all it takes to circumvent them is a meaningless 'sin tax'. Though this vote is largely ceremonial, considering the overwhelming support it already has, even within the DSA, the Empire must stand firm in its convictions."

- Legate Alrig Durmer

"A full ban on wetland damage will actually cripple industry, ambassador."

Tarsonis wrote:.

"So,..is it a tax?...or a fine?

My only issue that it's not very clear how this is supposed to operate. Do we basically buy the rights to fill in a bayou?"

"Sure. Lets call it a fine. I suppose its a bit more like purchasing a permit."

Lolz and Civfive wrote:In a thick country accent, the ambassador speaks: "I don't need sum govahment body tellin' mah nation 'ow to control its envahroment".

"The WA is like a post-scarcity society: 'Need' isn't a concern at all!"

"Hmmm, well we already have strict environmental controls, this only makes them stricter. Shouldn't be too much of a bother. We support."

Senior Communications Delegate Tom Weisenhauer politely clears his throat and begins: "While there is technically no federal government in Hill City outside of monitoring WA compliance, it would not actually be possible to contravene any specific proposals in the text due to environmental controls that are impossible to avoid in the Dome, anyway. We enthusiastically support the wetland protection initiatives and look forward to contributing the resources we save by not having to reverse any wetland destruction to international research and enforcement efforts." (FOR)

Weisenhauer promptly removes his badge in ceremonial fashion and silently hands it to an assistant before leaving, presumably resigning from some kind of sortition-based office after some given number of tasks.

"Against, because this proposal is literally impossible for my nation to follow." says Iksana. "We're one giant swamp. There is no way we can become a self-sufficient nation without some development of that swamp, there's no non-swamp land to construct replacement wetlands on, whether in the vicinity or otherwise, and mitigation credits? We're dependent on WA aid just to not all starve to death, do you really think we can afford mitigation credits?"

Essu Beti wrote:"Against, because this proposal is literally impossible for my nation to follow." says Iksana. "We're one giant swamp. There is no way we can become a self-sufficient nation without some development of that swamp, there's no non-swamp land to construct replacement wetlands on, whether in the vicinity or otherwise, and mitigation credits? We're dependent on WA aid just to not all starve to death, do you really think we can afford mitigation credits?"

Tislam simply rolls his eyes at this. "Have you tried putting things underground?" A quick toss supplies Iksana with a set of plans to penetrate the inevitable aquifer with. "Stilts might help too."

((OOC: Man, a Dwarf Fortress nation would be interesting to play. Heck, even just one with Dwarven physics...))

"Yes, dig underground. In a place already prone to flooding, thanks to the yearly monsoons. I beg your fucking pardon, but how much of a moron do you think I am?" Iksana takes a peek at the plans. "Who drew this, a trained monkey? And the explanation makes no sense at all- drain the water into the water itself? What? As for stilts, we already have that for buildings, but it's a bit difficult to do that for roads. And before you decide to be a smartass and say "bridges," the supports have to go deep and the shade from the bridge-roads and the footprint from the big-ass supports would be enough to be "development" of the swamps. We also need to clear land for farms, for food for the humans and feed for the animals to feed the elves."

Essu Beti wrote:((OOC: Man, a Dwarf Fortress nation would be interesting to play. Heck, even just one with Dwarven physics...))

OOC:
You'd have to call it something suitable Dwarfy, 'Nationterrors' or something.

Essu Beti wrote:"Against, because this proposal is literally impossible for my nation to follow." says Iksana. "We're one giant swamp. There is no way we can become a self-sufficient nation without some development of that swamp, there's no non-swamp land to construct replacement wetlands on, whether in the vicinity or otherwise, and mitigation credits? We're dependent on WA aid just to not all starve to death, do you really think we can afford mitigation credits?"

"Sweet, so when you resign to prevent the death of your society, dibs on your office!"

Still, very greatly opposed to this proposal. Just more bureaucracy! And more taxes! We need less government and more freedom! All these regulations are getting dreadfully restrictive! The World Assembly has just become more socialistic lately, and it is getting very depressing. It's basically a slap in the face of the more conservative and freedom loving nations, and a big hello to the commies who just love controlling others and getting more power. No thanks.

Another thing this proposal doesn't take into account is the level of advancement of the different nations. Many aren't advanced enough to be able to comply with this issue and still maintain a decent economy and society. They would have to go into debt to be able to do so, or become reliant on other nations. This greatly harms their potential for growth and their nations freedom. It also refuses to take into account the differences in environments for the varying nations. Some nations have far more wetland than others. This means that these nations will be impacted very unfairly and thus will suffer the most from this proposal. It will prevent them from expanding and growing. While nations with very little to no wetland will be rather unaffected by this proposal. Only those nations that will be significantly impacted by this bill should really get a say. Not those who just wish to force some self-righteous proposal down their throats and tell them they will do so or be fined for it.

"Oh woe is us, we're too short sighted and unimaginative to make bank selling safari and hunting expedition tours in all our vast mileage of pristine marshlands! Cry me a bog, landlubber."

A small child runs up, holding what seems to be a whiteboard along with a dry erase marker.
The board reads this: "Lmao screw trees"

Eldrahar wrote:Still, very greatly opposed to this proposal. Just more bureaucracy! And more taxes! We need less government and more freedom!

"Government and freedom are not mutually exclusive concepts."

All these regulations are getting dreadfully restrictive!

"It would hardly be a good law if it said 'Do what you want, you lot.'"

The World Assembly has just become more socialistic lately, and it is getting very depressing.

"Environmental regulation isn't socialistic. It has nothing to do with labor organization or distribution of wealth."

It's basically a slap in the face of the more conservative and freedom loving nations, and a big hello to the commies who just love controlling others and getting more power. No thanks.

"Ambassador, I don't think you understand conservatism, freedom, or communism."

Another thing this proposal doesn't take into account is the level of advancement of the different nations. Many aren't advanced enough to be able to comply with this issue and still maintain a decent economy and society.

"Its easy to use this strawman as an excuse. 'Many nations aren't advanced enough to be able to comply with Ban on Slavery and Trafficking and still maintain a decent economy and society.' You know what I have to say to them? Tough shit."

They would have to go into debt to be able to do so, or become reliant on other nations.

"Vanishingly unlikely, considering you can develop somewhere that isn't a wetland if you have a few, and mitigation credits are likely to be cheap if you have a lot of wetlands."

This greatly harms their potential for growth and their nations freedom. It also refuses to take into account the differences in environments for the varying nations. Some nations have far more wetland than others. This means that these nations will be impacted very unfairly and thus will suffer the most from this proposal. It will prevent them from expanding and growing. While nations with very little to no wetland will be rather unaffected by this proposal.

"I genuinely don't think you understand my proposal at all."

Only those nations that will be significantly impacted by this bill should really get a say.

"Ambassador, that's downright un-democratic!"

Not those who just wish to force some self-righteous proposal down their throats and tell them they will do so or be fined for it.

"Ambassador, if you want to go toe-to-toe on this topic, I will cheerfully oblige. Cite the section which causes you the most grief and why, and I will explain to you why you are wrong, in detail and using citations."

Separatist Peoples wrote:"Sweet, so when you resign to prevent the death of your society, dibs on your office!"

"Here's my society's official response to that." Iksana raises a middle finger at him. "Did you somehow miss the part about us being dependent on the WA for aid so we don't all starve to death? Also if we ever resign, when we become self-sufficient, I'm auctioning that sucker off. It's a real prize of an office."

Seperatist People, given it is your proposal, I don't expect you to be logical about it all. You'd defend it to your last breath. No matter how horrible of an idea it is. Which it is. My problem is with the whole damned proposal. Not just part of it. It is a big mess of rules, regulations, restrictions, and just adds more bureaucracy and taxes. Especially for those who don't wish to comply. Well, my nation will ignore this nonsense like everything else we disagree with. And no amount of sanctions will make a difference. Besides, trying to force us will simply harm the environment you claim to wish to protect, so good luck there.

The Candy Of Bottles wrote:

Essu Beti wrote:"Against, because this proposal is literally impossible for my nation to follow." says Iksana. "We're one giant swamp. There is no way we can become a self-sufficient nation without some development of that swamp, there's no non-swamp land to construct replacement wetlands on, whether in the vicinity or otherwise, and mitigation credits? We're dependent on WA aid just to not all starve to death, do you really think we can afford mitigation credits?"

Tislam simply rolls his eyes at this. "Have you tried putting things underground?" A quick toss supplies Iksana with a set of plans to penetrate the inevitable aquifer with. "Stilts might help too."

OOC: My nation is an underground city beneath a wetland

Essu Beti wrote:Also if we ever resign, when we become self-sufficient, I'm auctioning that sucker off. It's a real prize of an office."

You can't auction off something that isn't yours.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:You can't auction off something that isn't yours.

"If someone can call dibs on it, we can auction it."

Eldrahar wrote:Seperatist People, given it is your proposal, I don't expect you to be logical about it all. You'd defend it to your last breath.

"Oh no way. I've got better things to do with my final breath."

No matter how horrible of an idea it is. Which it is. My problem is with the whole damned proposal. Not just part of it.

"So make an argument based on actual text. Take a line, give me an argument as to how it will hurt nations, and base it logically off what you've cited. Not generalized rants that can apply to the entire body of law."

It is a big mess of rules, regulations, restrictions, and just adds more bureaucracy and taxes.

"You can say that about literally all WA resolutions."

Especially for those who don't wish to comply.

"Thats the entire damn point of a law, to make people who don't want to comply comply."

Well, my nation will ignore this nonsense like everything else we disagree with.

OOC: Noncompliance is godmodding in this forum.
IC: "So your nation is an untrustworthy bunch of oathbreakers? Then why should I give a damn about how this affects you?"

And no amount of sanctions will make a difference.

"Bet I could figure out a way to change that."

Besides, trying to force us will simply harm the environment you claim to wish to protect, so good luck there.

"Wetlands are not generally harmed significantly by explosive ordinance, as opposed to draining them and paving over them. If the C.D.S.P. wanted to force you, it wouldn't harm the wetlands that seriously."

Essu Beti wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:You can't auction off something that isn't yours.

"If someone can call dibs on it, we can auction it."

"Not quite" say Quintus, as he absentmindedly measures the windows of said office. "The building managers decide who gets what office. Now if that building manager is your 3rd cousin by marriage twice removed,... you have a leg up."

Oh, there are better ways to harm the wetlands than bombs. Besides, the people of Eldrahar are waging a revolution against the leftists and large government right now, so they reject adding more to what they are currently fighting against. Also, being one of the most scientifically advanced nations, we can come up with plenty of ways to exact revenge on those who try and enforce their ways on us. Chemical warfare will be much more effective than just bombing countries back to the stone ages.