NATION

PASSWORD

[SUBMITTED] Repeal "National Economic Freedoms"

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

[SUBMITTED] Repeal "National Economic Freedoms"

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 14, 2018 6:41 pm

Repeal "National Economic Freedoms"
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GA#68 | Proposed by: Cute Puppies


National Economic Freedoms (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The General Assembly,

Commending the noble efforts of GAR#68 for attempting to protect the integrity of member nations' economies;

However, appalled by the resolution's ambiguity and vague text which makes it exceptionally vulnerable to abuse and loopholes, flaws which essentially prevent the resolution from accomplishing its goal of protecting national economic freedoms;

Distressed by the resolution's mandate stating that "no commerce be generally restricted by the WA except in the instance where the enterprise causes an extreme hazard to national populations,";
  1. This clause imposes tremendous limits to the World Assembly's authority to regulate commerce, especially on issues such as the sale of illegal contraband and hazardous materials, workers' rights and discrimination, and on pollution from industrial waste disposal;
Perplexed by the department created by GAR#68, Impartial Mediation Foundation, and its equivocal and ill-defined goals to "investigate, mediate, and arbitrate any conflicts that arise,";
  1. The resolution fails to define how the organization, Impartial Mediation Foundation, functions, what it does, and what conflicts it deals with;
Desiring to make way for a resolution that more effectively deals with the issue of economic freedoms of member nations;

Hereby repeals GAR#68, "National Economic Freedoms"

Repeal "National Economic Freedoms"
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GA#68 | Proposed by: Cute Puppies


National Economic Freedoms (Category: Free Trade; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The General Assembly,

Commending the noble efforts of GAR#68 for attempting to protect the integrity of member nations' economies;

However,

Appalled by the resolution's ambiguity and vague text which makes it exceptionally vulnerable to abuse and loopholes;

Convinced that most of the resolution's text holds little significance, value, or relevance to its mandates despite GAR#68 being classified as a "Strong" resolution on free trade;
  1. The "Noting" clause in the preamble fails to provide any context to the subject matter the resolution is based on;
  2. Its first mandate, "Allows national governments to regulate commerce within their jurisdiction," is nothing more than negligible rhetoric;
Distressed by the resolution's mandate stating that "no commerce be generally restricted by the WA except in the instance where the enterprise causes an extreme hazard to national populations,";
  1. In essence, this clause limits the World Assembly's authority to regulate commerce greatly, especially on issues such as workers' rights, pollution from the manufacturing sector, and welfare;
Perplexed by the department created by GAR#68, Impartial Mediation Foundation, and its equivocal and ill-defined goals to "investigate, mediate, and arbitrate any conflicts that arise,";
  1. The resolution fails to define what the Impartial Mediation Foundation does, and what conflicts it deals with;
Hereby repeals GAR#68, "National Economic Freedoms"


GAR#68, National Economic Freedoms
Last edited by Cute Puppies on Sat Apr 28, 2018 10:05 am, edited 10 times in total.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8749
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:32 pm

I'd prefer use of alphabetical lists. Also, generally, preamble clauses end with commas rather than semicolons, with lists introduced with colons. I'm also unclear about the purpose of a 1-element list. And the last sentence needs to end with a full stop.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:35 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I'd prefer use of alphabetical lists.

OOC: Noted. I'll revise that.
If you don't mind me asking, how do you feel about repealing GAR#68, and do you believe the reasoning I provided in my proposal effectively deals with why GAR#68 should be repealed?

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8749
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:36 pm

Cute Puppies wrote:If you don't mind me asking, how do you feel about repealing GAR#68, and do you believe the reasoning I provided in my proposal effectively deals with why GAR#68 should be repealed?

I support repeal of GA 68. I've written my own resolution to achieve that goal. If you are in earnest with this proposal, I will happily give you authorisation to incorporate portions of that proposal into this one.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:44 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:If you don't mind me asking, how do you feel about repealing GAR#68, and do you believe the reasoning I provided in my proposal effectively deals with why GAR#68 should be repealed?

I support repeal of GA 68. I've written my own resolution to achieve that goal. If you are in earnest with this proposal, I will happily give you authorisation to incorporate portions of that proposal into this one.

That's a very generous offer! Thank you so much! I would love to collaborate with you on this topic, and will credit you as co-author for your support if I incorporate portions of your proposal into my proposal. But, because you're undoubtedly a better writer and have far more experience in the WA, if you wish to submit your repeal first, I'll be happy to put my proposal aside.

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:11 am

OOC: I made some grammatical edits and minor reformatting.

User avatar
Glory to the HYPNOTOAD
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 9
Founded: Mar 23, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Glory to the HYPNOTOAD » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:13 am

Virkanys psychotic dictatorship believes that this resolution should not be repealed. WA Delegate speaking on behalf of the region. Good day to you sir!
WA delegate of Cae,

Proud psychotic dictatorship

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:18 am

Glory to the HYPNOTOAD wrote:Virkanys psychotic dictatorship believes that this resolution should not be repealed. WA Delegate speaking on behalf of the region. Good day to you sir!

Why do you believe this resolution should stay on the General Assembly? Would you possibly reconsider supporting this repeal of there was chance of another proposal ammending National Economic Freedoms' problems while reestablishing some of its positive mandates?

User avatar
Misthas
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 190
Founded: Feb 05, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Misthas » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:20 am

Personally, I'd support repealing any resolution that supports economic freedom. URA!
Востанирес из рун
From the ruins of Minthas, we have risen

A level 16 civilization, according to you know what index
Economic: +0.87 | Social: -1.35


COMF NEWS: The 5th Armored Division, 76th Paratrooper Regiment "Henrich Weibel" and 4th Airborne Division are being transported to the southern Magyarijan border to combat the imperialist aggressors.

User avatar
Glory to the HYPNOTOAD
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 9
Founded: Mar 23, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Glory to the HYPNOTOAD » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:54 am

Cute Puppies wrote:
Glory to the HYPNOTOAD wrote:Virkanys psychotic dictatorship believes that this resolution should not be repealed. WA Delegate speaking on behalf of the region. Good day to you sir!

Why do you believe this resolution should stay on the General Assembly? Would you possibly reconsider supporting this repeal of there was chance of another proposal ammending National Economic Freedoms' problems while reestablishing some of its positive mandates?

I believe that this would be a good arrangement for Virkanys phychotic dictatorship, we wish to have our own right on how we govern our economy, however at first it seemed that you were trying to take away that, our apologizes if we misunderstood. Good day to you sir!

EDIT due to grammer
Last edited by Glory to the HYPNOTOAD on Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
WA delegate of Cae,

Proud psychotic dictatorship

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:54 am

Bump

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8749
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:55 am

This didn't really need a bump.

Author: 1 SC and 28 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:59 am

OOC Draft 2 is up. I reformatted the proposal, elaborated on some of my clauses, and added a clause which brings attention to GAR#68's mandate, national governments to compensate any individual, group of individuals, or national governments for any physical property or money seized by that national government, excepting those assets used for criminal enterprise," a mandate that I feel to be completely irrelevant to national economic freedoms and free trade.

EDIT: I added a poll
Last edited by Cute Puppies on Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The New Nordic Union
Envoy
 
Posts: 312
Founded: Jul 08, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The New Nordic Union » Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:05 pm

Cute Puppies wrote:despite GAR#68 being classified as a "Strong" resolution on free trade


More of a question than a note: I am not sure in how far the strength classifications are in universe or rather meta-gaming/game mechanics.
Last edited by The New Nordic Union on Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Permanent Representative of the Nordic Union to the World Assembly: Katrin við Keldu

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:33 pm

The New Nordic Union wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:despite GAR#68 being classified as a "Strong" resolution on free trade


More of a question than a note: I am not sure in how far the strength classifications are in universe or rather meta-gaming/game mechanics.


OOC: A resolution can (in increasing order of strength) be considered mild, significant, or strong. According the the official guide, "General Assembly Rules for Proposals," a resolution's strength "determines the effect a proposal has on a nation's policy." The term, strong, refers to a resolution with "a very broad area of policy in a dramatic way" and is the greatest degree of strength a resolution can be.

User avatar
The New Nordic Union
Envoy
 
Posts: 312
Founded: Jul 08, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The New Nordic Union » Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:01 pm

Cute Puppies wrote:
The New Nordic Union wrote:
More of a question than a note: I am not sure in how far the strength classifications are in universe or rather meta-gaming/game mechanics.


OOC: A resolution can (in increasing order of strength) be considered mild, significant, or strong. According the the official guide, "General Assembly Rules for Proposals," a resolution's strength "determines the effect a proposal has on a nation's policy." The term, strong, refers to a resolution with "a very broad area of policy in a dramatic way" and is the greatest degree of strength a resolution can be.


Yes, that I know, of course. What I mean, however, is whether this is something we can adress in other resolutions, or not. Because when a proposal has incorrect strength, it is normally illegal, and if I recall correctly, illegality is not a reason for appeal.
Last edited by The New Nordic Union on Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Permanent Representative of the Nordic Union to the World Assembly: Katrin við Keldu

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:27 pm

The New Nordic Union wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:
OOC: A resolution can (in increasing order of strength) be considered mild, significant, or strong. According the the official guide, "General Assembly Rules for Proposals," a resolution's strength "determines the effect a proposal has on a nation's policy." The term, strong, refers to a resolution with "a very broad area of policy in a dramatic way" and is the greatest degree of strength a resolution can be.


Yes, that I know, of course. What I mean, however, is whether this is something we can adress in other resolutions, or not. Because when a proposal has incorrect strength, it is normally illegal, and if I recall correctly, illegality is not a reason for appeal.


Apologies. My intention of bringing up its strength in my repeal is to point out how many of its clauses and mandates are very minimal and negligible - not to challenge the legality of the resolution - but to show how the resolution was poorly written.
Thank you for pointing out your concerns. I'll try to rewrite this clause in the next draft in order to get my point across better.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 4800
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:27 pm

"Do you have a replacement being drafted?"
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:06 am

Kenmoria wrote:"Do you have a replacement being drafted?"

"It's currently being drafted. However, being that I have never made a proposal to the GA that has passed, I would prefer to work closely with an experienced writer and regional delegates to make an improved bill reaffirming nation's economic freedoms and rectifying what GAR68 failed to do."

User avatar
Burninati0n
Envoy
 
Posts: 277
Founded: Oct 15, 2008
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Burninati0n » Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:15 am

Cute Puppies wrote:"It's currently being drafted. However, being that I have never made a proposal to the GA that has passed, I would prefer to work closely with an experienced writer and regional delegates to make an improved bill reaffirming nation's economic freedoms and rectifying what GAR68 failed to do."

IA is in favor of this because GAR#68 effectively blocks the GA from imposing certain kinds of free trade / free market policies, which I presume he wishes could be established. (Incidentally, it also effectively blocks the GA from imposing certain anti-trade/anti-market policies.)

However, given the current flavor of the WA, it's probably not wise to repeal GAR#68 unless you're immediately intending to block the imposition of certain free trade / free market policies, since the WA vote leans a bit in that direction. That said, there are huge issues with GAR#68, many of which you mention.

So in short, I would like to see GAR#68 repealed, but only with some assurance that its repeal won't be a door opening to the imposition of neoliberal policies on nations (such as my own) that have no interest in being ravaged by the disaster that is neoliberalism.

User avatar
Cute Puppies
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 155
Founded: Apr 12, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cute Puppies » Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:26 am

Burninati0n wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:"It's currently being drafted. However, being that I have never made a proposal to the GA that has passed, I would prefer to work closely with an experienced writer and regional delegates to make an improved bill reaffirming nation's economic freedoms and rectifying what GAR68 failed to do."

IA is in favor of this because GAR#68 effectively blocks the GA from imposing certain kinds of free trade / free market policies, which I presume he wishes could be established. (Incidentally, it also effectively blocks the GA from imposing certain anti-trade/anti-market policies.)

However, given the current flavor of the WA, it's probably not wise to repeal GAR#68 unless you're immediately intending to block the imposition of certain free trade / free market policies, since the WA vote leans a bit in that direction. That said, there are huge issues with GAR#68, many of which you mention.

So in short, I would like to see GAR#68 repealed, but only with some assurance that its repeal won't be a door opening to the imposition of neoliberal policies on nations (such as my own) that have no interest in being ravaged by the disaster that is neoliberalism.


What would you specifically like to see in the replacement proposal?

User avatar
Burninati0n
Envoy
 
Posts: 277
Founded: Oct 15, 2008
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Burninati0n » Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:39 am

Cute Puppies wrote:What would you specifically like to see in the replacement proposal?

Basically the remainder of the proposal after the excision of the clause about having to compensate private property owners. (That clause would essentially make it an international violation to have a communist revolution if people were reading it closely.) The blocker on the WA being used for arbitrary trade restrictions (or loosenings) serves to protect us from a neoliberal firestorm, and I appreciate that.

However, this is not at all an area in which I am familiar with writing, so good luck with that ;)

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 14315
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:45 am

Burninati0n wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:What would you specifically like to see in the replacement proposal?

Basically the remainder of the proposal after the excision of the clause about having to compensate private property owners. (That clause would essentially make it an international violation to have a communist revolution if people were reading it closely.) The blocker on the WA being used for arbitrary trade restrictions (or loosenings) serves to protect us from a neoliberal firestorm, and I appreciate that.

However, this is not at all an area in which I am familiar with writing, so good luck with that ;)

"That assumes that a revolution wouldn't operate as a de facto resignation. A transition from not-communist to communist over time wouldn't face significant cost issues, since nationalization could be done on schedule based on available funds. But a sudden revolution that effectively changes the government would bring up continuity issues. In effect, the old government is destroyed and the new government is installed, making many of the old laws defunct. That seems to me like a de facto repudiation of membership, since we can assume the new government would have to ratify the decision to join the World Assembly. There is no law that so specifies this, but based on the nature of sudden government changes, I don't see why this would be an unreasonable position to take on the matter."

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence and Chief Populist Elitist


User avatar
Desmosthenes and Burke
Envoy
 
Posts: 227
Founded: Oct 07, 2017
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Desmosthenes and Burke » Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:28 am

Burninati0n wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:What would you specifically like to see in the replacement proposal?

Basically the remainder of the proposal after the excision of the clause about having to compensate private property owners. (That clause would essentially make it an international violation to have a communist revolution if people were reading it closely.) The blocker on the WA being used for arbitrary trade restrictions (or loosenings) serves to protect us from a neoliberal firestorm, and I appreciate that.

However, this is not at all an area in which I am familiar with writing, so good luck with that ;)


In opposition, we would want to see the clause on compensating private property owners strengthened. We would only support a repeal and replacement that further strengthened a global system of capitalistic free trade. We see making it more difficult for nations to practice the great evils known as Socialism and Communism as a feature, not a bug and are only interested in a repeal to the extent it clears the way to relegating such evils to the dustbin of history where they belong.

OOC: Or, in plainer terms, I am not sure this should be repealed. I do not believe a replacement could be written without alienating either the left or right, while the status quo basically leaves neither of them with what they want.
Last edited by Desmosthenes and Burke on Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Burninati0n
Envoy
 
Posts: 277
Founded: Oct 15, 2008
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Burninati0n » Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:34 am

Desmosthenes and Burke wrote:In opposition, we would want to see the clause on compensating private property owners strengthened. We would only support a repeal and replacement that further strengthened a global system of capitalistic free trade. We see making it more difficult for nations to practice the great evils known as Socialism and Communism as a feature, not a bug and are only interested in a repeal to the extent it clears the way to relegating such evils to the dustbin of history where they belong.

^ This position demonstrating the reason it might be prudent to leave even the flawed GAR68 in place!

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CreepyCut, Sciongrad

Advertisement

Remove ads