NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] A Convention on National Economic Freedoms

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
East Gondwana
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 405
Founded: Jun 24, 2015
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby East Gondwana » Sat Apr 21, 2018 8:29 am

"The final phrase of Clause 4, "whether it be laissez-faire capitalism or communism." seems to suggest that they are the only permissible or existing economic systems; I would recommend removing this phrase as it is irrelevant to the rest of the clause."
PRO: LGBTI rights and liberation, social democracy, libertarian socialism, trade unions, Uluru Statement From The Heart, democracy, human rights, feminism, climate action and environmentalism, BLM/SOSBA, two-state solution

ANTI: capitalism, fascism, authoritarianism, communism (all kinds), Australian immigration policy, cops at pride, corporate 'activism', racism, fossil fuels industry, state violence

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

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 21, 2018 8:11 pm

East Gondwana wrote:"The final phrase of Clause 4, "whether it be laissez-faire capitalism or communism." seems to suggest that they are the only permissible or existing economic systems; I would recommend removing this phrase as it is irrelevant to the rest of the clause."

"Apologies. I have removed the phrase."

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 4792
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun Apr 22, 2018 11:45 pm

"I would recommend thinking of a different title. This proposal wouldn't be a bill once it is passed, it would be an act or a convention or something similar. Also, “replacement” doesn't sit well with me."
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 » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:18 pm

Kenmoria wrote:"I would recommend thinking of a different title. This proposal wouldn't be a bill once it is passed, it would be an act or a convention or something similar. Also, “replacement” doesn't sit well with me."

How does the new title sound? Is it a tad bit too long?

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 4792
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:31 pm

Cute Puppies wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:"I would recommend thinking of a different title. This proposal wouldn't be a bill once it is passed, it would be an act or a convention or something similar. Also, “replacement” doesn't sit well with me."

How does the new title sound? Is it a tad bit too long?

"Being a bit wordy isn't that bad in the General Assembly, it's fine in my eyes."
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
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8746
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Apr 24, 2018 5:48 am

Section 2 is unacceptable.

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 24, 2018 2:28 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Section 2 is unacceptable.

Why and how can section 2 be improved?

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8746
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Apr 24, 2018 4:56 pm

Cute Puppies wrote:Why and how can section 2 be improved?

Inclusion of a line like this:
The World Assembly reserves to itself the power to regulate commerce in member nations for any reason by primary or secondary legislation.

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 » Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:05 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Cute Puppies wrote:Why and how can section 2 be improved?

Inclusion of a line like this:
The World Assembly reserves to itself the power to regulate commerce in member nations for any reason by primary or secondary legislation.


Would it still be alright to keep section 2 if I added that?

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 4792
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:06 am

Cute Puppies wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Inclusion of a line like this:
The World Assembly reserves to itself the power to regulate commerce in member nations for any reason by primary or secondary legislation.


Would it still be alright to keep section 2 if I added that?

(OOC: Given the current section two almost diametrically opposes this one, I wouldn't.)
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 » Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:35 pm

I've included Imperium Anglorum's line, but tried to retain the premise of clause 2.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8746
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:29 pm

Well, you didn't. I won't vote for a replacement for NEF that does not block blockers like NEF and the one you have proposed here.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:30 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 » Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:39 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Well, you didn't. I won't vote for a replacement for NEF that does not block blockers like NEF and the one you have proposed here.

My replacement bill aims to formally recognize nations' local commerce as an issue of national sovereignty. It does not intend to block WA regulation on commerce.

EDIT: I completely forgot about the part which explicitly prevents the WA from interfering in local commerce. I apologize for my blatant obliviousness.

I changed clause 2 and added clause 5. Clause 2 now simply recognizes local commerce as an issue of national sovereignty but does not block the WA from making legislation on these affairs. And clause 5 incorporates your statement.
Last edited by Cute Puppies on Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aclion
Senator
 
Posts: 4041
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Aclion » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:32 pm

I think it strange that you want to repeal National Economic Freedoms on the grounds that the restrictions on regulation of commerce are too burdensome, but then want to replace it with a resolution that contains a guarantee that "formally recognizes member nations’ local commerce and economic affairs as an issue of national sovereignty"

It's also strange that the same proposal reserves the power to regulate commerce in member nations for any reason.

You don't seem to have made up you mind on what your position is. Is local commerce a matter of national sovereignty or it is an appropriate field for WA legislation?
Last edited by Aclion on Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A free society rests on four boxes: The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammo box.
XKI: Recruiter, TITO Knight
TEP: WA Executive Staff member
Forest: Cartographer
Oatland: Caesar, Cartographer

It is the citizen's duty to understand which box to use, and when.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 4792
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:43 pm

"You're missing a space before “Formally” in clause 2."
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
Auralia
Senator
 
Posts: 4915
Founded: Dec 15, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Auralia » Fri Apr 27, 2018 12:50 pm

I second Aclion's question. I'd also add that the provisions relating to eminent domain would be better off in a resolution dedicated to that purpose, rather than as something tacked on to make a blocker legal; the same holds true for the original NEF.

Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly

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

Postby Cute Puppies » Fri Apr 27, 2018 6:08 pm

The original goals I had in mind when making this replacement bill were, in short, to:
A. Remove the ill-defined and unnecessary commission of the original NEF
B. Formally recognize local commerce as an issue of National sovereignty
C. Prevent the GA from making resolutions that intrude and burden nations' economies like NEF, but expand the types of resolutions the GA can make on this issue

I'm going to make another draft soon. I've decided to continue to recognize local commerce as an issue of National sovereignty, and explicitly prevent future legislation that affects this with the exception of resolutions concerning industrial waste disposal and pollution in the manufacturing sect of the economy, workers' rights and welfare, illegal contraband and the trade of hazardous materials, and of interstate commerce.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8746
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:35 pm

Didn't recognise Auralia for a second there. I guess he's now a French Communist. But I will oppose any legislation which includes a blocker for future economic legislation. I will also oppose any replacement which does not reserve to the World Assembly the power to create, at its will, future regulations on the economy.

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
Auralia
Senator
 
Posts: 4915
Founded: Dec 15, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Auralia » Fri Apr 27, 2018 9:04 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I guess he's now a French Communist.

Do Communists have a monopoly on the colour red or something?

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

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 28, 2018 7:21 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Didn't recognise Auralia for a second there. I guess he's now a French Communist. But I will oppose any legislation which includes a blocker for future economic legislation. I will also oppose any replacement which does not reserve to the World Assembly the power to create, at its will, future regulations on the economy.

On second thought, ending all future legislation on local economic affairs from the GA is too dramatic of a mandate, and likely exceeds what a GA proposal or resolution should do.

Would a formal recognition of nations' local commerce and economic affairs as an issue of national sovereignty without barring future economic legislation be a good compromise? I could clarify in the end of the bill that, while this bill thoroughly discourages it, the General Assembly still reserves the right to regulate member nations' local commerce.

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

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 28, 2018 8:48 am

Draft 3 is out.

EDIT: I will submit the repeal and replacement proposal very soon. I feel confident that these bills accurately addresses the flaws of GAR#68 and why these necessitate a repeal and replacement. Thank you, everyone, for sharing your opinions and constructive criticism on this proposal. Whether or not this manages to reach quorum, I thank everyone for their help.

I understand that this may be too early to post my draft, but because of personal and health issues unrelated to NS and my coming AP exams, and because I feel confident with proposals' final products, I would like to submit it soon.

For the sake of preventing confusion, I'm submitting this proposal under my alternate account which I intend to use from now on as my WA nation, Zone 71.
Last edited by Cute Puppies on Sat Apr 28, 2018 9:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Postby Cute Puppies » Sat Apr 28, 2018 11:37 am

Because GAR#68 has not yet been repealed, I have withdrawn this proposal as it would currently be illegal for duplication.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 4792
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Mon Apr 30, 2018 11:35 pm

"You are still missing a space before “Formally” at the beginning of clause 2."
Last edited by Kenmoria on Mon Apr 30, 2018 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18402
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Mon May 07, 2018 6:19 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Wrapper wrote:I can't recall any previous legislation urging/recommending the GA do something, only member nations. I don't see the point.

Repeals do it all the time.

OOC
Repeals "urging" new legislation have tended to get declared illegal because that was itself counted as an operative clause. "Hoping for" the replacement is more acceptable.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8746
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Mon May 07, 2018 6:14 pm

Bears Armed wrote:OOC Repeals "urging" new legislation have tended to get declared illegal because that was itself counted as an operative clause. "Hoping for" the replacement is more acceptable.

I explicitly called for a replacement here. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30&p=32730365&hilit=repeal#p32730365 There was no objection at the time.

And before Fris, or the like, comes here to tell me about how I'm trolling the rules,
  1. Where is this rule explicitly? Insofar as it is conditional on what an operative clause is, then:
  2. Why should we find clauses, which do not act in any way on member nations, illegal? How does that benefit the game?
Secondarily, since this is non-repeal legislation, insofar as the Assembly can outright block certain types of future legislation, why can't it also recommend or discourage certain other types of future legislation? The power to block must supersede the power to recommend.

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

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads