My Least Favorite Issue

[Hassett]

I always have had a problem with issue 17, "Corporations Demand Political Say"

A well-heeled lobby group is pushing for the elimination of regulations that prevent corporations from donating money to political parties.

"This is supposed to be a democratic country," Information Technology industry spokesperson Max Hamilton says. "Yet these archaic laws say I can't donate money to support a political party. They put ceilings on the amount any party can spend on advertising. It's time to stop treating voters like children, and trust them to make up their own minds. Free the ballot box!"

"You say political freedom, I hear vote-buying," says popular anarchist Dave Jong-Il. "If these fat cats get their way, politicians will buy their own seat in Congress. And let's face it, a slick advertising campaign can convince a lot of apathetic voters. We need to tighten the laws, not repeal them. Money should have no place in politics!"

"Frankly, I don't see why we need to have elections at all," says your brother, Tobias Utopia, over a late-night malt whiskey. "You always seem to know what's best. Why not scrap the whole political system? It would make things so much simpler."

I have received this issue several times and I always choose the first option, which should raise political freedoms, but it does not! It lowers them, which doesn't make sense, by opening a political avenue for coporations, this equals more freedoms but somehow it lowers them?
Furthermore, the second option really kicks me, an anarchist wants to tighten laws? Say what? And this is meant to increase political freedoms?

Anyone else agree with me?

[/rant]

[Purpelia]

I have received this issue several times and I always choose the first option, which should raise political freedoms, but it does not! It lowers them, which doesn't make sense, by opening a political avenue for coporations, this equals more freedoms but somehow it lowers them?
Furthermore, the second option really kicks me, an anarchist wants to tighten laws? Say what? And this is meant to increase political freedoms?

Anyone else agree with me?

Giving corporations the right to give money to politics leads to corporations taking votes away from the people.
So clearly it should lower political freedoms.

[New South Hell]

I always have had a problem with issue 17, "Corporations Demand Political Say"

A well-heeled lobby group is pushing for the elimination of regulations that prevent corporations from donating money to political parties.


I have received this issue several times and I always choose the first option, which should raise political freedoms, but it does not! It lowers them, which doesn't make sense, by opening a political avenue for coporations, this equals more freedoms but somehow it lowers them?
Furthermore, the second option really kicks me, an anarchist wants to tighten laws? Say what? And this is meant to increase political freedoms?

Anyone else agree with me?

[/rant]

I have been keeping a list of effects of issues on the three freedoms and on government type for quite some time now. The nations involved are a wide variety of nation types. I have recorded the results of making choice 1 of this issue 229 times. And not once in all those times have the nation's political freedoms been lowered.

I'm not going to tell you that it didn't happen to you. I've seen many issue choices where occasionally the effect goes in a different direction from the usual. All I can say is, if I'm right that I have the various kinds of nations well covered, then the chances this will happen to you are really small.

In 75 of those 229 times, either the political freedom level increased, or the government type changed to one with more freedom. The rest of the time, neither changed.

My conclusion is that the game understands that legalizing corporate political donations generally increases political freedoms and that for some reason your nation was a very special case (or conceivably that you misremembered or misunderstood the effect on your nation).

[North Wiedna]

I have received this issue several times and I always choose the first option, which should raise political freedoms, but it does not! It lowers them, which doesn't make sense, by opening a political avenue for coporations, this equals more freedoms but somehow it lowers them?
Furthermore, the second option really kicks me, an anarchist wants to tighten laws? Say what? And this is meant to increase political freedoms?

Anyone else agree with me?

Giving corporations the right to give money to politics leads to corporations taking votes away from the people.
So clearly it should lower political freedoms.

That makes absolutely no sense.

"oh lol heres some money now he can't vote lol nice for us huh?"

[Hassett]

I always have had a problem with issue 17, "Corporations Demand Political Say"

A well-heeled lobby group is pushing for the elimination of regulations that prevent corporations from donating money to political parties.


I have received this issue several times and I always choose the first option, which should raise political freedoms, but it does not! It lowers them, which doesn't make sense, by opening a political avenue for coporations, this equals more freedoms but somehow it lowers them?
Furthermore, the second option really kicks me, an anarchist wants to tighten laws? Say what? And this is meant to increase political freedoms?

Anyone else agree with me?

[/rant]

I have been keeping a list of effects of issues on the three freedoms and on government type for quite some time now. The nations involved are a wide variety of nation types. I have recorded the results of making choice 1 of this issue 229 times. And not once in all those times have the nation's political freedoms been lowered.

I'm not going to tell you that it didn't happen to you. I've seen many issue choices where occasionally the effect goes in a different direction from the usual. All I can say is, if I'm right that I have the various kinds of nations well covered, then the chances this will happen to you are really small.

In 75 of those 229 times, either the political freedom level increased, or the government type changed to one with more freedom. The rest of the time, neither changed.

My conclusion is that the game understands that legalizing corporate political donations generally increases political freedoms and that for some reason your nation was a very special case (or conceivably that you misremembered or misunderstood the effect on your nation).

Interesting, because this has happened to me and a friend of mine, Conservative Alliances several times. I remember the last time I recieved this issue and chose option 1, my political freedoms dropped from World Benchmark to Superb.

[Conservative Alliances]

I have been keeping a list of effects of issues on the three freedoms and on government type for quite some time now. The nations involved are a wide variety of nation types. I have recorded the results of making choice 1 of this issue 229 times. And not once in all those times have the nation's political freedoms been lowered.

I'm not going to tell you that it didn't happen to you. I've seen many issue choices where occasionally the effect goes in a different direction from the usual. All I can say is, if I'm right that I have the various kinds of nations well covered, then the chances this will happen to you are really small.

In 75 of those 229 times, either the political freedom level increased, or the government type changed to one with more freedom. The rest of the time, neither changed.

My conclusion is that the game understands that legalizing corporate political donations generally increases political freedoms and that for some reason your nation was a very special case (or conceivably that you misremembered or misunderstood the effect on your nation).

Interesting, because this has happened to me and a friend of mine, Conservative Alliances several times. I remember the last time I recieved this issue and chose option 1, my political freedoms dropped from World Benchmark to Superb.

Happened to me not to long ago.
http://conservative.nationstates.net/na ... orporatism

[Gilthador]

Giving corps. political say would lower civil rights, political freedom, AND economic freedom (except for the corporate big-wigs, of course).

[Conservative Alliances]

Giving corps. political say would lower civil rights, political freedom, AND economic freedom (except for the corporate big-wigs, of course).

Not really. Expanding political freedoms to more groups should increase political freedoms.

[Arumdaum]

I have received this issue several times and I always choose the first option, which should raise political freedoms, but it does not! It lowers them, which doesn't make sense, by opening a political avenue for coporations, this equals more freedoms but somehow it lowers them?
Furthermore, the second option really kicks me, an anarchist wants to tighten laws? Say what? And this is meant to increase political freedoms?

Anyone else agree with me?

Giving corporations the right to give money to politics leads to corporations taking votes away from the people.
So clearly it should lower political freedoms.

I didn't let corporations give money to political parties and my political freedoms went down by five points.

[Arumdaum]

Interesting, because this has happened to me and a friend of mine, Conservative Alliances several times. I remember the last time I recieved this issue and chose option 1, my political freedoms dropped from World Benchmark to Superb.

Which is even more interesting, since choosing #2 dropped mine from excessive to superb. And #3 doesn't work either obviously. Maybe it just makes political freedoms go down no matter what?

[Conservative Alliances]

Interesting, because this has happened to me and a friend of mine, Conservative Alliances several times. I remember the last time I recieved this issue and chose option 1, my political freedoms dropped from World Benchmark to Superb.

Which is even more interesting, since choosing #2 dropped mine from excessive to superb. And #3 doesn't work either obviously. Maybe it just makes political freedoms go down no matter what?

Damn, that issue must just suck overall. I'll just dismiss it from now on.

[Kelkheim]

I find the effects of option 2 even more disturbing...

It was among the first 4 issues I decided for my nation and it basically destroyed my economy. It plummeted from "strong" 70 to a "reasonable" 36.

These are the issues that came into effect overnight and the private donations one is the only one I would suspect of having any effect on the economy:

# 15 hours ago: Kelkheim was reclassified from "New York Times Democracy" to "Democratic Socialists".
# 15 hours ago: Following new legislation in Kelkheim, political parties are banned from advertising and receiving private donations.
# 15 hours ago: Following new legislation in Kelkheim, organ donation is compulsory.
# 15 hours ago: Following new legislation in Kelkheim, voting is voluntary.
# 15 hours ago: Following new legislation in Kelkheim, same-sex marriages are increasingly common.

Are smaller countries affected more strongly by issues, since their overall economy is smaller?
Or could any of the other issues have an effect on the economy? Has anyone had similar experiences?

[Burgundozavria]

Are smaller countries affected more strongly by issues

Yes.

Or could any of the other issues have an effect on the economy?

No, voting, compulsory organ donation and same-sex marriages doesn't influence economy at all.