NationStates

Friday Freshman wrote:

Three Weasels wrote:And that is OUR problem because...? Why should the members of the WA care about your financial incompetence?

And what are those meaningless arbitrary numbers you're proposing? Did you pull those out of your ass or did your economists decide that those numbers just looked pretty?

He said do you have any other evidence. I cited myself as evidence. I'm positive other countries have the same problem. The WA should care about financial incompetence in countries because this incompetence can lead to a global meltdown.

And how exactly does this resolution prevent a "global meltdown". You seem to be assuming that every nation in debt is a hegemon, and therefore will cause problems if it has financial problems. This isn't the case.

One unclear thing is whether the total you gave is how much a nation can borrow in total, or just from one nation.

Also, how exactly does making arbitrary limits and forcing governments to scrap spending stop a global meltdown?

Friday Freshman wrote:

Three Weasels wrote:And that is OUR problem because...? Why should the members of the WA care about your financial incompetence?

And what are those meaningless arbitrary numbers you're proposing? Did you pull those out of your ass or did your economists decide that those numbers just looked pretty?

He said do you have any other evidence. I cited myself as evidence. I'm positive other countries have the same problem. The WA should care about financial incompetence in countries because this incompetence can lead to a global meltdown.

Fortunately, the world is much larger in NationStates then the game RealLife^(TM), so such catastrophic issues have a much, much smaller impact on the world economy. We don't have two or three economic superpowers, we have thousands of them. Your concerns for the world economy are duly noted and rejected, especially because the economy of the NS multiverse is also heavily dependent on non-WA nations, who outnumber us 7-1. Any resolution you pass to stabilize the world economy could only affect something like 1 in 7 nations. That is hardly going to make a measurable impact.

Your economy is in terrible shape? Thats a shame, but the grounds that it will affect the global market are entirely unreasonable.


Also, no, you cannot set the value for one NSD.

Dellin wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:
He said do you have any other evidence. I cited myself as evidence. I'm positive other countries have the same problem. The WA should care about financial incompetence in countries because this incompetence can lead to a global meltdown.

And how exactly does this resolution prevent a "global meltdown". You seem to be assuming that every nation in debt is a hegemon, and therefore will cause problems if it has financial problems. This isn't the case.

One unclear thing is whether the total you gave is how much a nation can borrow in total, or just from one nation.

Also, how exactly does making arbitrary limits and forcing governments to scrap spending stop a global meltdown?

I gave two totals.

$50 billion NS dollars is the maximum amount you can borrow from a single nation.

$20 trillion NS dollars is the maximum amount you can borrow in total from other nations.

The limits are meant to help governments stay afloat and not fall into a situation like the modern day United States where the government votes every year or so to raise the amount of money they can borrow. This becomes and endless loop and there is never a stop until the country itself collapses from lack of money.

Separatist Peoples wrote:Also, no, you cannot set the value for one NSD.

Why not? (Not whining just want to understand what the problem is)

The limits are meant to help governments stay afloat and not fall into a situation like the modern day United States where the government votes every year or so to raise the amount of money they can borrow. This becomes and endless loop and there is never a stop until the country itself collapses from lack of money.

Yes, but just because something is happening in the game of Real Life, doesn't mean it directly applies to NationStates.

This doesn't negate the fact that the limits are completely arbitrary.

Dellin wrote:

The limits are meant to help governments stay afloat and not fall into a situation like the modern day United States where the government votes every year or so to raise the amount of money they can borrow. This becomes and endless loop and there is never a stop until the country itself collapses from lack of money.

Yes, but just because something is happening in the game of Real Life, doesn't mean it directly applies to NationStates.

This doesn't negate the fact that the limits are completely arbitrary.

You need to draw the line in the sand somewhere. I choose these numbers because they were pretty.

Arbitrary numbers, all of the arbitrary numbers.

Friday Freshman wrote:

Dellin wrote:
Yes, but just because something is happening in the game of Real Life, doesn't mean it directly applies to NationStates.

This doesn't negate the fact that the limits are completely arbitrary.

You need to draw the line in the sand somewhere. I choose these numbers because they were pretty.

The fact that a country can have problems below these limits or might remain stable after these limits means imposing these limits as an arbitrary basis will ultimately do more harm than good or really inevitably prevent nothing.

Imperializt Russia wrote:Arbitrary numbers, all of the arbitrary numbers.

Yep

Dellin wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:
You need to draw the line in the sand somewhere. I choose these numbers because they were pretty.

The fact that a country can have problems below these limits or might remain stable after these limits means imposing these limits as an arbitrary basis will ultimately do more harm than good or really inevitably prevent nothing.

What do you want percentages?

Friday Freshman wrote:

Imperializt Russia wrote:Arbitrary numbers, all of the arbitrary numbers.

Yep

Earth's GDP is about $80tn in USD.
There are a raft of countries with several times the population of the earth - and, because NS is :ns: - first-world societal status.

Limiting borrowing or debt or whatever to $20tn could actually be financially crippling to these supernations.

This is one of many reasons why arbitrary numbers, particularly in financial situations, are looked upon highly unfavourably in WA legislature.

Friday Freshman wrote:

Dellin wrote:
The fact that a country can have problems below these limits or might remain stable after these limits means imposing these limits as an arbitrary basis will ultimately do more harm than good or really inevitably prevent nothing.

What do you want percentages?

No, I don't want another arbitrary figure to replace the one you have. I want a well thought out proposal that is actually backed by facts and data rather than silly limits that ultimately accomplish nothing.

Dellin wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:
What do you want percentages?

No, I don't want another arbitrary figure to replace the one you have. I want a well thought out proposal that is actually backed by facts and data rather than silly limits that ultimately accomplish nothing.

The problem with that it is practically impossible to get a poll of all nations and how much they spend.

Friday Freshman wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:Also, no, you cannot set the value for one NSD.

Why not? (Not whining just want to understand what the problem is)

Determining a universal form of currency is unrealistic. Making it a gold standard is going to unfavorably support nations with higher gold reserves then, say, platinum reserves, which may be the standard for a nation's currency. Or a credit standard. Or perhaps even systems that don't function on valued currency in the way you think of. There are plenty of pure socialist and communist states in the WA that go without currency altogether. Why, last week I had a representative of a nation from Breen offer me gold-pressed Latinum, and I believe that Three Weasels may just utilize an entirely dairy-based, eatable form of currency...not sure, though. We're still miffed since they ruined my lunch last week by swiping the cheese off my sandwich. And then, of course, theirs PPU...those plants give me the creeps...Quetzalcoatl only knows what they use to trade.

Friday Freshman wrote:

Dellin wrote:
No, I don't want another arbitrary figure to replace the one you have. I want a well thought out proposal that is actually backed by facts and data rather than silly limits that ultimately accomplish nothing.

The problem with that it is practically impossible to get a poll of all nations and how much they spend.

Which is the pitfall when it comes to direct, authoritative control of the world economy here in the NS Multiverse. And why this bill wont work.

Friday Freshman wrote:

Dellin wrote:
No, I don't want another arbitrary figure to replace the one you have. I want a well thought out proposal that is actually backed by facts and data rather than silly limits that ultimately accomplish nothing.

The problem with that it is practically impossible to get a poll of all nations and how much they spend.

Which is going to make an effective legislature on something so micromanaging, and so easily handwaved, and so rarely thought of in many's nation management, impossible.

Separatist Peoples wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:
The problem with that it is practically impossible to get a poll of all nations and how much they spend.

Which is the pitfall when it comes to direct, authoritative control of the world economy here in the NS Multiverse. And why this bill wont work.

Imperializt Russia wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:
The problem with that it is practically impossible to get a poll of all nations and how much they spend.

Which is going to make an effective legislature on something so micromanaging, and so easily handwaved, and so rarely thought of in many's nation management, impossible.

Le Sigh. Your right. I wish there was something that I could actually write a resolution about without having to deal with political correctness extremists (Not pointing out any of you as them).

Separatist Peoples wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:
Why not? (Not whining just want to understand what the problem is)

Determining a universal form of currency is unrealistic. Making it a gold standard is going to unfavorably support nations with higher gold reserves then, say, platinum reserves, which may be the standard for a nation's currency. Or a credit standard. Or perhaps even systems that don't function on valued currency in the way you think of. There are plenty of pure socialist and communist states in the WA that go without currency altogether. Why, last week I had a representative of a nation from Breen offer me gold-pressed Latinum, and I believe that Three Weasels may just utilize an entirely dairy-based, eatable form of currency...not sure, though. We're still miffed since they ruined my lunch last week by swiping the cheese off my sandwich. And then, of course, theirs PPU...those plants give me the creeps...Quetzalcoatl only knows what they use to trade.

Hahaha, we wish. Though it's a good idea, it doesn't work in practice. We tried - it was done solely to resolve a bipartisan dispute many suns ago. Our currency, the Krinx is based on the platinum standard.

We don't regret swiping your cheese though. It was for a very good cause. And we'd do it again!

As for this proposal, the "world" in World Assembly doesn't mean we all share a single planet. It would take more than the meltdown of a few tiny insignificant nations to justify limitations on spending and borrowing. The limits do not account for individual taxation rates of member nations. Or the basic costs of government operation.

Setting limits will severely harm larger member nations, whose operating costs would be greater than the set limits. For smaller nations, it would utterly destroy them. To have such high limits and lack the tax payer base to support such borrowing limits...

I rise to renew the USP's offer to provide financial stability by accepting taking all of the other countries money and then distributing it as we see fit. This is as we see it the only viable answer to this looming problem.

You can make all of the checks payable to Nigel S Youlkin.

This appears to be an attempt to skirt the rules on defining a currency, though we're not sure if it's illegal or not ...

Nevertheless, this appears to not be an international issue that needs such strict definition - especially given the fixed debt ceilings regardless of each nation's ability to pay and its size. Therefore, opposed.

Separatist Peoples wrote:And then, of course, theirs PPU...those plants give me the creeps...Quetzalcoatl only knows what they use to trade.

A large potted plant in a big plantpot with wheels suddenly comes to life, revealing a large leaf curled up to form a cone, from which a somewhat hissing voice can be heard:

"We would like to assure you that the only our selves that might legitimately give you the creeps are the mobile creeper vines, which do not necessarily need to be planted in a single plant pot, and event then they would only be in search of nourishment or water. A glass of water is most likely more interesting to them than you. And as a sapient being, you are safe from all of our selves, unless you try to intentionally cause serious damage^* to one of us.

Now, as to the issue of currency, while we do have one, the fractal leaves are less a currency for trade as such, and more just pieces of original art by those of our selves that are artistically gifted enough to deposit the pigments in their leaves in aesthetically pleasing fractal forms. We have little need for a currency based on any metal - if anything, we would base one on the most essential trade material between our selves and the outsiders; carbon. We finance the material and energy needs of our nation by selling our "services" of photosynthesis, partaking the upkeep of the oxygen-breathers within the WA Headquarters.

If we need to deal with a nation that trades only via currency, we refer them to our Araraukarian allies, but of course they are not in the WA.

With these facts in mind, we set our selves on the opposing side of this strange and unnecessary proposal."

* Please note that picking fruits that have been created to be edible does not count as intent to cause damage, nor would be minor pruning for salad-making purposes.

^^ My point. I understand this resolution won't work I think we can stop beating the dead horse.

It didn't get past the draft stage. May we put this bill to rest. LONG LIVE THE WORLD ASSEMBLY!

Friday Freshman wrote:It didn't get past the draft stage. May we put this bill to rest. LONG LIVE THE WORLD ASSEMBLY!

This is what? Number four or number five that turned into a lame duck?

Friday Freshman wrote:Mr. Pearson,

Your incompetence is something of much amusement to me. You seem to want to put in laws as blockers as if the WA is a game of chess. We do not have time for your shenanigans and wish that when this law fails to be passed that you will resign your position as a delegate to the WA. We hope that maybe in your absence something meaningful will find it's way to the floor.

Yours Truly,

Colin Friday
Delegate of the New Republic of Friday Freshman

Care to revise your statement Mr. Ambassador?

Chester Pearson wrote:

Friday Freshman wrote:Mr. Pearson,

Your incompetence is something of much amusement to me. You seem to want to put in laws as blockers as if the WA is a game of chess. We do not have time for your shenanigans and wish that when this law fails to be passed that you will resign your position as a delegate to the WA. We hope that maybe in your absence something meaningful will find it's way to the floor.

Yours Truly,

Colin Friday
Delegate of the New Republic of Friday Freshman

Care to revise your statement Mr. Ambassador?

Mr. Friday;

While it is true that our debates with Mr. Pearson have rarely seen anything approaching agreement, we are fully aware of the fact that he is highly learned and conscientious about his position as an Ambassador to the World Assembly, and to classify him as incompetent due to his disagreement with your draft proposal, which, for the record we also find to be incredibly naïve and simplistic, is disingenuous to the extreme. Should you continue down this path of denigrating anybody who dares disagree with your drafts you may well find any support you may have had in these chambers to be in the process of withering away to nothing. Please rethink your current debate tactics.

Lord Eugene
His Majesty's Ambassador to The World Assembly.