Reforms of Education and pension plan

[Fremenilia]

Oh. This here.

Nowhere in the real world uses "social contribution point[s] as a substitute for cash." Even if they did, imagine John, a man with 1,200 SCPs. John lives in a home which can only be resided in by people with more than 1,180 SCPs. One day, John drives past a major car accident instead of helping the victims, and loses 50 SCPs. John no longer has enough SCPs to live in his house. John's friend, Sarah, has 800 SCPs. She helped the victims, but only earned 25 SCPs and so cannot swap houses with John. (Assume that all houses are currently occupied and more cannot be immediately built to satisfy John's new requirements. Nobody else has gained or lost any SCPs, and their houses are not at risk.) Where will John live?

I will add to this. And what if the people driving by are unable to assist? Take David for example. David is on his way to the hospital with his wife, who is in labor and in distress. David, by the logic in the proposal, loses points for not helping. Caroline is also driving by. Caroline is an amputee and one of her arms is prosthetic and not high-tech so is not as useful in helping others out of the wreck. Caroline loses points because she cannot help. I won't even begin to start on how untrained bystanders may actually be more harmful to such a situation. What if it isn't just a major car wreck, and also involves a wrecked truck carrying something like Caesium-137, extremely radioactive powder? Could one really expect unprotected bystanders to intervene and risk their lives in order to keep their points? Mine are poor examples, and I'm sure more situations exist, but we cannot expect everyone around us to halt their lives and help if something goes wrong.

Opposed on more than just that, but once again, opposed.

EDITED because I misread who posted that and did not double check. my bad.

As a lifeguard(while not a very high position it is at least where I am considered a minor medical role) I can confirm we are told to keep bystanders AWAY from the scene, as they usually are of no help and only make things worse, getting in the way etc.

[HarveyKingdoms]

This response is fractally wrong or, generously, misleading at least at multiple levels.

The specific open market operations done by the Federal Reserve are not the only way one can create money. It is a specific mechanism which the Federal Reserve does to sterilise its money creation processes. One should not confuse practice with necessity. But beyond that, it's pretty intuitive that quantitative easing (alternatively called large scale asset purchases) positively affected the economy once you consider general equilibrium effects. Eg Montecino & Epstein 2015 and Lenza & Slacalek 2018.

But beyond QE, the proposed mechanism to "solve" the non-existent problem would actually exacerbate the harms which you claim, if your causal mechanism held. "Funds in which all people own shares", if taken to mean broad-based index funds, are commonly known to be held mostly by richer people in retirement accounts. The actual people who are poor do not earn enough money to forego consumption and make asset market purchases. Your impacts also do not follow: printing money to make asset purchases does not stabilise the money supply at all. The implied impact that we want a stable money supply also bites into the harms of bad monetary policy, making it something we wouldn't want in the first place.

---

I imagine that in the author's mind, the mutual fund you have to donate to – in real terms at least, the language is unclear whether you have to donate nominal money or whether it will be taken from you by inflation – will act as some kind of superhuman venture capital fund that will build fully-automated gay space communism. Doing so would expand aggregate supply, reducing price levels (causing deflation or at least disinflation; the latter is bad though). I'll leave it to you to form an opinion as to whether that is plausible.

As soon as everyone is born, they will be allocated free shares of the fund (All people's fund, APF) as basic welfare of support their basic living, education (fund support) and pension fund.
1. Sources of fund of APF: Government will provide investment funding for all peoples to APF, sources of fund may come from tax, and or Central bank of that country buy the bonds issued by APF.
2. Use of fund of APF: APF will firstly use their fund on investment ONLY (so it will increase the future production and led to support the value of cash), and the return of profit (after deduct cost of capital and tax) will shared by all people/shareholder (and project owners, operators, guarantors/investors)
a. to invest on real economy industry and supporting research, target will propose by professional and decision will make by all shareholders by vote via mobile apps (and/or other way)
b. provide seed capital for startup business (request personal guaranty from project owner and their guarantors), >50% profit on investment will shared by APF as interest return. All shareholder have credit line (guaranty )to make their own decision on invest/support which projects.
c. provide investment to support students for education & living (if they need), 5% private income (decides by all peoples by vote, I just recommend as example)will shared by APF as return on investment (to that student).
d. invest on City construction and infrastructure

It a better solution of solve the economic problems,...

compare of traditional solution that only increase money supply via bank system, because of the bank will more interest on provide loan to wealthy people / large corp as they have better credit (and more easily to handle) that compare with many real economy industry that lack of cash. And these rich people and big companies tend to use their money for real estate speculation, derivatives and stocks, especially real estate speculation (because they can be used as collateral for banks), so they have limited help to the real economy; more because real estate prices are speculated It will make life more difficult for the real economy and the people at the grassroots level. What's more, the newly increased money supply is shared by the whole people to bear the losses caused by inflation, but in fact only the rich can borrow low-interest loans to create more wealth, so it will create a larger gap between the rich and the poor, making the The government needs more spending to help the poor.

And my solution is to use the newly increased money supply (or/and part of the government's tax revenue) directly through the APF to directly increase the production capacity of the real economy by provide investment fund to entrepreneurship, scientific research projects(patent)and supporting real enterprises (unspent reserves are deposited in the bank then lend it to other companies and individuals, so rich people and large corp still can get more loan), since the future production capacity is increased, it can also alleviate future inflation, and this APF is also shared by all the people and dividends (and share the interest of deposit), so this will help reduce the poverty gap , and also help the government save on other relief expenses.

[Separatist Peoples]

"There is little reason offered here to radically change a system of social support that predates this effort and has no major problems."

[HarveyKingdoms]

As a lifeguard(while not a very high position it is at least where I am considered a minor medical role) I can confirm we are told to keep bystanders AWAY from the scene, as they usually are of no help and only make things worse, getting in the way etc.

I just want to use this social contribution point system (SCP) and differentiated benefits (usually referring to the right of preference, for example, students with higher points can give priority to choosing a better bed)…

...to encourage students and seniors to do more volunteer work in schools (and nursing homes)...

…SCP calculates the score based on the “time spent by the relevant volunteers + the evaluation of the service quality of the volunteers by other nearby people” (this criterion is proposed and voted by all participants)…

…what are you doing with these extreme examples?

[HarveyKingdoms]

OOC: Nonsense aside (as a supporter of The Gay Agenda™), see GA#91, GA#457, and GA#603

Are you saying that "homosexuality is normal" and that all our future children should be encouraged to be gay too?

I agree that homosexuals should not be discriminated against…

...but it is undeniable that homosexuals are born based on their genetic or/and psychological problems that are different from ordinary people (and everyone has this tendency more or less. In particular, there will be more cases of pure boys' schools or pure girls' schools, because everyone is easy to influence each other). If you deny this statement, it means that homosexuals are normal people, and other heterosexual people are abnormal!

I do not oppose homosexuals' right to marry and have basic human rights with others, but I do not support "encourage everyone to be gay" or "condone children's tendency to increase homosexuality" ← (What I want to express is that children should be Inculcate correct sexuality and encourage them to be heterosexual to avoid them becoming gay)

The proposal I put forward is to provide students with correct sex education, normal sexual concepts and improve their sexual skills at the right time (so that they can attract the opposite sex more efficiently, save everyone's time, and improve society Overall productivity; also strengthen the relationship between couples through qualified sexual skills, reducing the chance of breakup and divorce)

It is because the traditional concept has neglected correct sex education, which has led to many tragedies, so I propose add Sexual training course on Edu.

[HarveyKingdoms]

The reasoning behind this scheme is a bit complicated. In fact, it is because of the recent advocacy of political correctness in the United States. I mean the excessive propaganda of "prohibition of discrimination against homosexuality", which has the effect of hypnotizing and brainwashing homosexuality. Therefore, I propose to introduce "sex skills education" into the education of the new generation. ”, the purpose is actually to instill correct sexual concepts in children during adolescence and reduce their exposure to homosexuality (and related ethos), which are always based on congenital genetic defects or mental problems; Homosexuals should be discriminated against, which is equivalent to that we should not discriminate against cancer patients, because each of us also has the opportunity to have cancer cells and lesions. This is also because WA has a word limit, and cannot introduce other articles in the proposal (because the article URL is also included in the word limit), so I did not explain in detail, but only said to strengthen students' communication skills (this includes body language, and sexual skills are one of the body language used to communicate between lovers).

Please provide useful help instead of being a keyboard warrior who only talks shit like the CCP's 50 cents

"All homosexuals are physically or mentally ill" is trolling. The "keyboard warrior" comment, delivered OOC, is flaming. Knock it off.

Goobergunchia
Game Moderator

If you don't support my proposal, you can vote against it in WA, I posting a proposal here, not to collect votes, but to have someone help improve it. . Since you leave a message here, you should write down the reasons for your opposition in detail (and preferably provide useful suggestions) instead of just making empty criticisms (← Objections without good reason are what keyboard warriors often do, this forum should not encourage such senseless behavior!)

[Fachumonn]

"All homosexuals are physically or mentally ill" is trolling. The "keyboard warrior" comment, delivered OOC, is flaming. Knock it off.

Goobergunchia
Game Moderator

-Snip-

I think you're talking to a MOD.

[Separatist Peoples]

"In addition to other comments, we see no possible reason to teach that homosexuality is in any way inappropriate. Sexual activities between consenting parties is a personal, it governmental, concern."

[Juansonia]

Are you saying that "homosexuality is normal" and that all our future children should be encouraged to be gay too?

I agree that homosexuals should not be discriminated against…

...but it is undeniable that homosexuals are born based on their genetic or/and psychological problems that are different from ordinary people (and everyone has this tendency more or less. In particular, there will be more cases of pure boys' schools or pure girls' schools, because everyone is easy to influence each other). If you deny this statement, it means that homosexuals are normal people, and other heterosexual people are abnormal!

I do not oppose homosexuals' right to marry and have basic human rights with others, but I do not support "encourage everyone to be gay" or "condone children's tendency to increase homosexuality" ← (What I want to express is that children should be Inculcate correct sexuality and encourage them to be heterosexual to avoid them becoming gay)

The proposal I put forward is to provide students with correct sex education, normal sexual concepts and improve their sexual skills at the right time (so that they can attract the opposite sex more efficiently, save everyone's time, and improve society Overall productivity; also strengthen the relationship between couples through qualified sexual skills, reducing the chance of breakup and divorce)

It is because the traditional concept has neglected correct sex education, which has led to many tragedies, so I propose add Sexual training course on Edu.

to state that homosexuality is normal is not to claim that heterosexuality is abnormal. Normality is not dependent upon being the majority. Hand-based clocks would still be normal if digit-display clocks were more common. There are countless other examples where normalizing something - or even making it more common, does not make its opposite abnormal.

Besides, a moderator told you that you were trolling and flaming in some of your posts, both of which violate site rules. That's not an "empty criticism", it's a warning that, if you keep violating site policy, there will be consequences.

[Goobergunchia]

If you don't support my proposal, you can vote against it in WA, I posting a proposal here, not to collect votes, but to have someone help improve it. . Since you leave a message here, you should write down the reasons for your opposition in detail (and preferably provide useful suggestions) instead of just making empty criticisms (← Objections without good reason are what keyboard warriors often do, this forum should not encourage such senseless behavior!)

Read this.

Goobergunchia
Game Moderator

[The Forest of Aeneas]

Are you saying that "homosexuality is normal" and that all our future children should be encouraged to be gay too?

I agree that homosexuals should not be discriminated against…

...but it is undeniable that homosexuals are born based on their genetic or/and psychological problems that are different from ordinary people (and everyone has this tendency more or less. In particular, there will be more cases of pure boys' schools or pure girls' schools, because everyone is easy to influence each other). If you deny this statement, it means that homosexuals are normal people, and other heterosexual people are abnormal!

I do not oppose homosexuals' right to marry and have basic human rights with others, but I do not support "encourage everyone to be gay" or "condone children's tendency to increase homosexuality" ← (What I want to express is that children should be Inculcate correct sexuality and encourage them to be heterosexual to avoid them becoming gay)

The proposal I put forward is to provide students with correct sex education, normal sexual concepts and improve their sexual skills at the right time (so that they can attract the opposite sex more efficiently, save everyone's time, and improve society Overall productivity; also strengthen the relationship between couples through qualified sexual skills, reducing the chance of breakup and divorce)

It is because the traditional concept has neglected correct sex education, which has led to many tragedies, so I propose add Sexual training course on Edu.

OOC: I'll try to answer as calmly as I can.

I am saying that 'homosexuality is normal', yes. I also am not saying that 'heterosexuality is abnormal', nor do I want 'all our future children to be encouraged to be gay'. NO LGBT+ persons that I've met (I myself am LGBT+ for the record; the gay agenda statement above was meant with irony) seriously want to convert people into being LGBT+. Neither being LGBT+ or being heterosexual are inherently 'bad' or 'good'.

Moreover, your (strawman) statement that I am advocating 'all our future children to be encouraged to be gay' (emphasis mine) implies that being LGBT+ is a choice. If it was, very few people would be -- being forced to choose between being either closeted or constant discrimination (those aren't mutually exclusive either) is not fun. On the other hand, I do advocate education being supportive of LGBT+ -- not to encourage students to be LGBT+, but because sexual orientation is not a choice, and discrimination based on that needs to stop, including in schools.

People shouldn't be encouraged to be heterosexual. People shouldn't be encouraged to be LGBT+. Neither being LGBT+ or heterosexual are choices. People should be accepted for who they are.

Ambassador Cecilia Maro. 'Your proposed education encouraging people to be heterosexual would contradict GA#603. If you wish to pursue it, you should repeal that first.'

[Outer Sparta]

The OP isn't going to engage in any constructive criticism at all and somehow went on a tirade against LGBTs for whatever reason.

Ambassador Tav: This draft is about as useless as WA law as a handbrake on a canoe. It has more uses for kindle as part of a relaxing bonfire.

[Lamoni]

"All homosexuals are physically or mentally ill" is trolling. The "keyboard warrior" comment, delivered OOC, is flaming. Knock it off.

Goobergunchia
Game Moderator

If you don't support my proposal, you can vote against it in WA, I posting a proposal here, not to collect votes, but to have someone help improve it. . Since you leave a message here, you should write down the reasons for your opposition in detail (and preferably provide useful suggestions) instead of just making empty criticisms (← Objections without good reason are what keyboard warriors often do, this forum should not encourage such senseless behavior!)

Goobergunchia's post was giving you unofficial warnings for site rule violations, not critiquing your proposal. As such, Goobergunchia was posting in their official moderation role.

- Lamoni
NS Game Moderator

[HarveyKingdoms]

Goobergunchia's post was giving you unofficial warnings for site rule violations, not critiquing your proposal. As such, Goobergunchia was posting in their official moderation role.

- Lamoni
NS Game Moderator

I dont mean Goobergunchia on that "YOU", that YOU here mean someone
who just "Objections without good reason" so I called those people keyboard warrior.

So far, I am very disappointed that no one in the entire Forum has helped me with the grammar of the article, and no one has made useful suggestions!

[HarveyKingdoms]

OOC: I'll try to answer as calmly as I can.

I am saying that 'homosexuality is normal', yes. I also am not saying that 'heterosexuality is abnormal', nor do I want 'all our future children to be encouraged to be gay'. NO LGBT+ persons that I've met (I myself am LGBT+ for the record; the gay agenda statement above was meant with irony) seriously want to convert people into being LGBT+. Neither being LGBT+ or being heterosexual are inherently 'bad' or 'good'.

Moreover, your (strawman) statement that I am advocating 'all our future children to be encouraged to be gay' (emphasis mine) implies that being LGBT+ is a choice. If it was, very few people would be -- being forced to choose between being either closeted or constant discrimination (those aren't mutually exclusive either) is not fun. On the other hand, I do advocate education being supportive of LGBT+ -- not to encourage students to be LGBT+, but because sexual orientation is not a choice, and discrimination based on that needs to stop, including in schools.

People shouldn't be encouraged to be heterosexual. People shouldn't be encouraged to be LGBT+. Neither being LGBT+ or heterosexual are choices. People should be accepted for who they are.

Ambassador Cecilia Maro. 'Your proposed education encouraging people to be heterosexual would contradict GA#603. If you wish to pursue it, you should repeal that first.'

As I've said before, I'm not advocating discrimination against homosexuals! So this "Prohibition of Discrimination Against Homosexuals in Schools Act" does not need to be repealed!

It should be pointed out that students should be guided as much as possible to establish a correct sexual concept. The reason why human beings can continue to this day is because most normal people have worked hard to carry out the task of reproduction, and homosexuals obviously cannot.

As for forcing that homosexuality is nothing more than a choice and not a problem caused by genetic or/and psychological variation, this is clearly a deliberate reversal of right and wrong!

I support that "discrimination against homosexuals" is equivalent to "no discrimination against mentally ill", but it is obviously counterintuitive for some people to insist that "the mentally ill should be regarded as not sick".

A homosexual will deliberately lure someone into being gay because he wants to pursue that person; I have also faced the pursuit of a gay friend and almost changed my sexuality because of it! It is because of my own experience that I said before that homosexuality can be contagious (similarly, gender self-identification can also be influenced and changed)!

But no matter what, guiding students to have a healthy life and psychology (and will not "ban" homosexuality) is the correct educational policy!

teach bona fide to students under the age of majority if they have any, as part of their curriculum and appropriately to the ages of said students:
how sexual orientation, romantic orientation and gender identity are defined, developed and experienced, including but not limited to the fact that sexual orientation, romantic orientation and gender identity of individuals are beyond their conscious control, as well as that variance in sexual orientation, romantic orientation and gender identity is normal and natural,
WRONG CONCEPT

that individuals should not be considered to be “mentally ill”, “confused” or otherwise insane on the basis of their sexual orientation, romantic orientation or gender identity,
WRONG

that non-heterosexual relationships are equal to heterosexual ones, and
AGREE, its their own choice and human right

that one's gender is determined by their gender identity, rather than their sex assigned at birth
WRONG CONCEPT!
A is A, and B is B, A think that itself is B, but it still A!
A wants to force other people to regard A as B through education and legislation, which is obviously a kind of domineering behavior. This kind of domineering behavior violates the basic principles of "freedom of speech" and natural human rights!

It is immoral for the Democratic Party of the United States to modify relevant laws to reverse right and wrong by manipulating the direction of public opinion.

;

[Makko Oko]

As I've said before, I'm not advocating discrimination against homosexuals! So this "Prohibition of Discrimination Against Homosexuals in Schools Act" does not need to be repealed!

It should be pointed out that students should be guided as much as possible to establish a correct sexual concept. The reason why human beings can continue to this day is because most normal people have worked hard to carry out the task of reproduction, and homosexuals obviously cannot.

As for forcing that homosexuality is nothing more than a choice and not a problem caused by genetic or/and psychological variation, this is clearly a deliberate reversal of right and wrong!

I support that "discrimination against homosexuals" is equivalent to "no discrimination against mentally ill", but it is obviously counterintuitive for some people to insist that "the mentally ill should be regarded as not sick".

A homosexual will deliberately lure someone into being gay because he wants to pursue that person; I have also faced the pursuit of a gay friend and almost changed my sexuality because of it! It is because of my own experience that I said before that homosexuality can be contagious (similarly, gender self-identification can also be influenced and changed)!

But no matter what, guiding students to have a healthy life and psychology (and will not "ban" homosexuality) is the correct educational policy!

OOC: You say that but what about your sex skills education? If you aren't advocating discrimination against homosexuals as you so claim, then how do you explain this?

The reasoning behind this scheme is a bit complicated. In fact, it is because of the recent advocacy of political correctness in the United States. I mean the excessive propaganda of "prohibition of discrimination against homosexuality", which has the effect of hypnotizing and brainwashing homosexuality. Therefore, I propose to introduce "sex skills education" into the education of the new generation. ”, the purpose is actually to instill correct sexual concepts in children during adolescence and reduce their exposure to homosexuality (and related ethos), which are always based on congenital genetic defects or mental problems; Homosexuals should be discriminated against, which is equivalent to that we should not discriminate against cancer patients, because each of us also has the opportunity to have cancer cells and lesions. This is also because WA has a word limit, and cannot introduce other articles in the proposal (because the article URL is also included in the word limit), so I did not explain in detail, but only said to strengthen students' communication skills (this includes body language, and sexual skills are one of the body language used to communicate between lovers).
And the education I refer to in my proposal includes university education. During this period, many students are already adults, and some courses in my proposal are actually aimed at adult students (you have to pull in kindergarten students. Say, I have no choice, because of the word limit, it is unlikely that I will also write down the students of different ages for each course).

Because this sure sounds like you're wanting to discriminate against homosexuals, what with the 'correct sexual concepts' nonsense and other assorted things found within. No offense dude, but if you really want this proposal to pass, you probably don't want to tick off much of the general population while you're at it. You can say sex skills education isn't discrimination all you want, but it sounds to me like Chinese propaganda, if not worse.

This is the only message I'll send on this triage of a conversation, but I urge you to think before you choose to speak again, because we're getting WAY off topic here, and we need to get on topic. I do not mean to anger you with my comments, not my intention at all, so let's please just try to end the conversation on this VERY controversial topic here before mods decide to intervene.

Back onto your proposal though, I do actually have some feedback, you need to put definitions into your resolution, like actual defined words, because 'primary school' is not a term used in all nations, so you'll want to define and use a broad and generic term for all school levels.

[HarveyKingdoms]

To reiterate, I want to emphasize that heterosexuality should be encouraged (but not discriminated against homosexuality); because promoting homosexuality (violates the laws of nature, its abnormal) has the opportunity to reduce the birth rate and cause the human species to gradually disappear.

Otherwise, If homosexuality can be legalized and encouraged, then consanguineous relationships (marriage of parents and their own children, marriage of siblings) should be legalized and encouraged, because the truth is the same, it is the freedom and right of the individual! Legislation to prohibit "discrimination against close relatives" and "legalization of consanguineous marriages".

Also, sex with children should be legalized, otherwise it's age discrimination! Those "children" also have their human rights, they have the right to consider themselves "adults"! Anyway, gender cognition can be modified at will, why can't age?

The same principle, "human animal love" should also be encouraged, because everyone also has the right to "recognize" whether he is a dog or a cat!

OOC: You say that but what about your sex skills education? If you aren't advocating discrimination against homosexuals as you so claim, then how do you explain this?

The reasoning behind this scheme is a bit complicated. In fact, it is because of the recent advocacy of political correctness in the United States. I mean the excessive propaganda of "prohibition of discrimination against homosexuality", which has the effect of hypnotizing and brainwashing homosexuality. Therefore, I propose to introduce "sex skills education" into the education of the new generation. ”, the purpose is actually to instill correct sexual concepts in children during adolescence and reduce their exposure to homosexuality (and related ethos), which are always based on congenital genetic defects or mental problems; Homosexuals should be discriminated against, which is equivalent to that we should not discriminate against cancer patients, because each of us also has the opportunity to have cancer cells and lesions. This is also because WA has a word limit, and cannot introduce other articles in the proposal (because the article URL is also included in the word limit), so I did not explain in detail, but only said to strengthen students' communication skills (this includes body language, and sexual skills are one of the body language used to communicate between lovers).
And the education I refer to in my proposal includes university education. During this period, many students are already adults, and some courses in my proposal are actually aimed at adult students (you have to pull in kindergarten students. Say, I have no choice, because of the word limit, it is unlikely that I will also write down the students of different ages for each course).

Because this sure sounds like you're wanting to discriminate against homosexuals, what with the 'correct sexual concepts' nonsense and other assorted things found within. No offense dude, but if you really want this proposal to pass, you probably don't want to tick off much of the general population while you're at it. You can say sex skills education isn't discrimination all you want, but it sounds to me like Chinese propaganda, if not worse.

This is the only message I'll send on this triage of a conversation, but I urge you to think before you choose to speak again, because we're getting WAY off topic here, and we need to get on topic. I do not mean to anger you with my comments, not my intention at all, so let's please just try to end the conversation on this VERY controversial topic here before mods decide to intervene.

Back onto your proposal though, I do actually have some feedback, you need to put definitions into your resolution, like actual defined words, because 'primary school' is not a term used in all nations, so you'll want to define and use a broad and generic term for all school levels.

Pls adjust/correct related words and sentence directly, thx a lot!

[Trivalve]

HarveyKingdoms I am sorry but what?! That child point is just... why?

[Fremenilia]

I just want to use this social contribution point system (SCP) and differentiated benefits (usually referring to the right of preference, for example, students with higher points can give priority to choosing a better bed)…

...to encourage students and seniors to do more volunteer work in schools (and nursing homes)...

…SCP calculates the score based on the “time spent by the relevant volunteers + the evaluation of the service quality of the volunteers by other nearby people” (this criterion is proposed and voted by all participants)…

…what are you doing with these extreme examples?

Are you sure you didn’t just make this so that the SCP is in NS cannon?

[Kessig Wolf Run]

Okay, that was kinda funny, Fremenilia.

I must reiterate that elaborating here in the forums does not expand upon the proposal unless it is added. I understand the word limit, and your repeated requests for constructive criticism have not gone entirely unread, however, expecting others to edit out the extraneous bits to make room for these continuous elaborations on a whim is perhaps a bit much? You seem fairly attached to most of the proposal and asking others to "adjust/correct related words and sentences directly" may not go as you intend.

That being said. Surely you can understand our usage of extreme examples. We cannot be expected to automatically know what you actually meant or intended for that part of the proposal to do, which is why it would be highly ineffective-you needing to explain yourself a dozen times over merely hammers in my point.

If you ask me, if any of this were to ever actually be passed as effective legislation, the various sections of it should each be their own proposal, giving you room to get across what you actually want it to do in said proposals.

[The Forest of Aeneas]

Ambassador Cecilia Maro. 'To wit, we will oppose this proposal at least insomuch as this advocates 'training courses on [...] sexual skills' whose intent is to discourage LGBT+. However, as this is still non-binding, we will not implement those training courses in the highly unlikely chance that this passes.'

As I've said before, I'm not advocating discrimination against homosexuals! So this "Prohibition of Discrimination Against Homosexuals in Schools Act" does not need to be repealed!

'GA#603 does more than just prohibit discrimination in education based on sexuality or gender.'

Educating students to be heterosexual is absolutely discrimination against LGBT+. Your comments regarding LGBT+ issues in this thread make it very hard for me to support this OOCly too.

It should be pointed out that students should be guided as much as possible to establish a correct sexual concept. The reason why human beings can continue to this day is because most normal people have worked hard to carry out the task of reproduction, and homosexuals obviously cannot.

As for forcing that homosexuality is nothing more than a choice and not a problem caused by genetic or/and psychological variation, this is clearly a deliberate reversal of right and wrong!

You can NOT consciously change your sexual orientation. Again, very few people would CHOOSE to be forced between being closeted or constant discrimination and harassment (and again, those are not mutually exclusive; it's almost like forced outing is a thing). Moreover, are you implying that a slight decrease in human population is more important than the fact that pressuring people not to be LGBT+ is a form of discrimination?

I support that "discrimination against homosexuals" is equivalent to "no discrimination against mentally ill", but it is obviously counterintuitive for some people to insist that "the mentally ill should be regarded as not sick".

Except you have not demonstrated that being LGBT+ is a mental illness?

A homosexual will deliberately lure someone into being gay because he wants to pursue that person; I have also faced the pursuit of a gay friend and almost changed my sexuality because of it! It is because of my own experience that I said before that homosexuality can be contagious (similarly, gender self-identification can also be influenced and changed)!

'Changed my own sexuality because of it', holy shit. You don't choose to be LGBT+. You don't consciously 'change' your sexual orientation.

But no matter what, guiding students to have a healthy life and psychology (and will not "ban" homosexuality) is the correct educational policy!

Exactly. Being able to accept your sexuality without being labelled as 'mEnTaLlY iLl' or discriminated against for it would be 'healthy life and psychology'.

*snip*
A is A, and B is B, A think that itself is B, but it still A!
A wants to force other people to regard A as B through education and legislation, which is obviously a kind of domineering behavior. This kind of domineering behavior violates the basic principles of "freedom of speech" and natural human rights!

Your freedom of speech ends where other people's right to equality begins. That isn't 'domineering' or a violation of human rights. Discrimination because people think that their sexual orientation makes them better, on the other hand, is absolutely a violation of human rights.

To reiterate, I want to emphasize that heterosexuality should be encouraged (but not discriminated against homosexuality); because promoting homosexuality (violates the laws of nature, its abnormal) has the opportunity to reduce the birth rate and cause the human species to gradually disappear.

Again, a slight decrease in the human population does not outweigh the fact that discouraging a sexual orientation you don't like is wrong. People shouldn't be encouraged to be heterosexual, or LGBT+; that implies that it's a choice, which it fucking isn't. People should be accepted for who they are.

Otherwise, If homosexuality can be legalized and encouraged, then consanguineous relationships (marriage of parents and their own children, marriage of siblings) should be legalized and encouraged, because the truth is the same, it is the freedom and right of the individual! Legislation to prohibit "discrimination against close relatives" and "legalization of consanguineous marriages".

For fuck's sake. Nobody is 'encouraging' people to be LGBT+. People are, however, encouraging people to accept both themselves and others as LGBT+. Also, do show me any evidence that LGBT+ sex results in genetic disorders. None, huh?

Also, sex with children should be legalized, otherwise it's age discrimination! Those "children" also have their human rights, they have the right to consider themselves "adults"! Anyway, gender cognition can be modified at will, why can't age?

The same principle, "human animal love" should also be encouraged, because everyone also has the right to "recognize" whether he is a dog or a cat!

Fun fact: fucking RAPE is VERY different to fully consensual sex. Jesus.

[Attempted Socialism]

I dont mean Goobergunchia on that "YOU", that YOU here mean someone
who just "Objections without good reason" so I called those people keyboard warrior.

So far, I am very disappointed that no one in the entire Forum has helped me with the grammar of the article, and no one has made useful suggestions!

The useful suggestion that you have received in various forms is "the whole idea is non-viable". Your abject homophobia and transphobia, as you have revealed in this thread, are not helping your case, but fundamentally the "plan" you have is a non-starter because it's a series of bad policies thrown together with little to no apparent central theme. The uncanny valley English, which is an obvious result of machine translation, is really the least of your problems. I can't correct anything here because I can't even see what you're trying to do. Should I assume you want to improve WA nations and come with suggestions that edit out all the incomprehensible stuff alongside the obviously bad? There would be basically nothing left. Should I instead assume you're proposing a resolution with the central theme of "what bad policies can I imagine in a fever dream"? I don't know how to help you with that.

Ideally, you should refocus on a question, namely, what issue are you trying to solve with this policy? To elaborate:

- Establish the issue, the policy, and the implementation. First, what's the thing you try to solve? Answering this gives you a direction, and it lets others see where you want to go. Second, what's a sound policy to get to a solution? Is it something dangerous that must be banned, or can there be safe ways to transport nuclear material? And can your policy be adapted to get states, companies, or individuals to work with it? Third, which specific regulations do you require, and how are states supposed to enforce it? Do they just make doing X a crime? Shall they monitor X? Educate on the topic of X?
- Recognise that WA lawmaking is a marathon, not a sprint. It's common to see a resolution in the works weeks, if not months (And sometimes years) before it becomes a passed resolution.
- Reading the rules is a must, but applying them can be hard. It's beneficial to read up on passed resolutions or participate in other drafting threads to get a good feel for how the rules work in practise.
- When editing your draft, don't delete old drafts but put them in a spoiler, preferably in another post than your original post, and maintain your most current draft in your OP. Furthermore, while the pace of your drafting is up to you, you don't have to fix every issue immediately; you can work on a separate draft on your computer and only update your draft here when you have fixed a number of issues in a way that you are confident will work and not introduce more issues.
- Many topics require substantial work, and you may be required to demonstrate your grasp on the particulars of an issue during the drafting. If you have no understanding of transport, physics, and engineering, legislating on the topic of transport of nuclear fuel will be difficult.
- WA legislation is political, and while it's not necessary to curry favour with influential delegates, getting on their bad side or breaking decorum can sink an otherwise decent proposal. As an example, there are style guides that, while not required, are preferred by some delegates. Additionally, some topics (Or attempting repeals of some resolutions) are generally non-starters because of the general leanings of the WA.
(Originally posted here, as a reply to a specific proposal about transport of nuclear fuel.)

Thinking about your draft as a problem-solving exercise isn't the only way to do things, but it is far easier to help you with specific language if you do it that way. To help us and yourself you could also lay out the premises for your analysis of the problem and how you're approaching a solution. Especially as you seek help to review the fairly rough machine-translated language, because it will guide people to make suggestions in line with your thinking.

[Juansonia]

Harvey,

Your style of writing proposals is something like this:

The following is enacted
clauses
reasons
clauses
reasons

We tend to perfer formatting like

The World Assembly,

Recognising (reasons)

Acknowledging (more reasons)

etc...

Hereby

clauses

---

edit: here's my take on reformatting your origional proposal:

The world assembly,

Acknowledging the vulnerability of education to corruption and inefficiency,

Understanding that care for elders is also vulnerable to abuse and corruption,

hereby

Establishes a Decentralized Autonomous Management System, operating as an open-source blockchain mobile application,

Requires that state-owned schools have their policy determined by students, parents, and staff voting by this system,

Declares that this system will use randomly-formed committees of 99 users to evaluate proposed policy changes,

Establishes a mutual aid fund for the elderly and children, which will fund nurseries, schools, retirement homes, disability care, and hospital apprenticeship,

Urges agricultural facilities to integrate and communicate with this mutual aid fund and contributors and beneficiaries thereof,

Establishes the Social Contribution Points system, for which all citizens of a WA member state will have a score tied to their actions relating to their contributions to childcare, farming, and public maintenance,

Allocates different qualities of housing, food, and services to citizens of WA member states based on their scores,

Requires that all students undergo wilderness survival training and first aid courses,

Urges corporations and charity hospitals to establish apprenticeship programs which students may enroll in.

Encourages the use of gamification to encourage students to self-study and to practice memory improvement, financial ability, and communication skills,

Establishes the Education, Venture Capital and Pension Mutual Fund, of which every citizen of a WA member is a shareholder,

Requires that central banks of WA member states which have a central bank to buy 100-year zero-rate bonds from this fund,

Encourages the use of the fund to invest in productivity-increasing measures and practices, by issuing 30-year loans and requiring recipient projects to donate half of their profit to the fund,

Requires said mutual fund to sponsor the education costs of students, and requires said students to repay the funds within thirty years, and to subsequently give five percent of their lifetime income to the fund,

Yeah, this still has no chance of passing, but it might save some space for more clauses.