[Passed!] Repeal Numismatics Appreciation Act

[Scion Lop On]

I figured while we're cleaning house, we may as well take a crack at removing some of the touchy-feely resolution that do very little to improve the world. Which is not to say that I don't think cultural heritage is important, but the magnitude in which the resolution involves the World Assembly in trivial aspects of national culture is unnecessary. So, without further ado:

The General Assembly,

COMMENDING the intentions of General Assembly Resolution #56, insofar as it aims to preserve the monetary culture of member nations;

DISPUTING, however, that the currency of a nation is a "monumental part of [its] history," as well as the notion that "cultural heritage and tradition can be preserved through the safeguarding of each nation’s currency;"

ASSERTING that the amount of resources alloted to preserving one miniscule aspect of a nation's history, as provided in GAR#56, is superfluous;

ACKNOWLEDGING that GAR#56 states, in relevant part:

4. Obligates each World Assembly member nation to regulate the buying and selling of coins and banknotes;

REGRETTING that clause four contravenes the intended purpose of the resolution by creating an opt-out for unwilling nations due to a lack of mandatory regulations, aside from the requirement that "World Assembly member nations [regulate] the buying and selling of coins and banknotes," to any degree in which they find acceptable;

CONSIDERING it to be unnecessary for the World Assembly to regulate the trade of currency, as standard market price determination is more effective than an international grading system established by WANA;

CLARIFIES that nations may still create establishments dedicated to the preservation of their currencies, notwithstanding the passage of the repeal;

FURTHER CLARIFIES that General Assembly Resolution #56 does not prevent one-world currencies, nor does it involve itself in economic mediums of exchange, aside from items that are collected privately for cultural or personal reasons;

Hereby,

REPEALS General Assembly Resolution #56, "Numismatics Appreciation Act."

[Ossitania]

1. The word "contending" doesn't mean what you think it does.

2. We don't see any compelling arguments to repeal GA #56. It is a harmless piece of fluff that puts in little on the nation.

[Scion Lop On]

1. The word "contending" doesn't mean what you think it does.

How does "disputing" sound? I seem to be extending the definition of contending a bit to far, I suppose.

2. We don't see any compelling arguments to repeal GA #56. It is a harmless piece of fluff that puts in little on the nation.

Ambassador, the resolution's existence rests on its fluffiness. It provides no benefit, and by existing, burdens member nations. The WANA is an unnecessary mechanism, and accomplishes something that can already be done individually. The argument that it's necessary because member nations may or may not create such establishments individually is non-applicable because such establishments are unnecessary in the first place.

[Buffett and Colbert]

I figured while we're cleaning house, we may as well take a crack at removing some of the touchy-feely resolution that do very little to improve the world. Which is not to say that I don't think cultural heritage is important, but the magnitude in which the resolution involves the World Assembly in trivial aspects of national culture is unnecessary. So, without further ado:

There is no reason to categorize resolutions that have already been passed by how much arbitrary good they do. If the World Assembly passed it once, and it still does no harm, there is no reason to repeal. But that's not even the main reason this resolution should not be repealed. This resolution DOES do good. Not only does it safeguard cultural heritage, but it regulates an industry that, when left unattended, gives rise to unfair business practices and fraud.

CONTENDING, however, that the currency of a nation is a "monumental part of [its] history," as well as the notion that "cultural heritage and tradition can be preserved through the safeguarding of each nation’s currency;"

One of those clauses is not operative and the other hardly qualifies. They have little impact, and serve only to give depth to the resolution.

ASSERTING that the amount of resources alloted to preserving one miniscule aspect of a nation's history, as provided in GAR$56, is superfluous;

It is stipulated that the WANA is funded by private donations as well as the World Assembly General Fund. It is not a drain on the Organization's resources by any means. Yet the gains are phenomenal. A whole business is being regulated to promote fair business practices and consumer protection, while safeguarding national history and perhaps more importantly, sovereignty.

REGRETTING that subsection "a" of the clause in question contravenes the intended purpose of the stipulation by limiting regulations to those regarding "formal" currency auctions;

This makes no sense. The clause, first of all, does not limit the regulation to this, since it employs the words "such as" before hand. Either way, I'm not sure how it would contravene the resolution's purpose. It should also be noted that in this suggestion, licensed dealers are also included. This is extremely relevant considering this clause refers specifically to taxes, and most nations would not impose taxes on informal commercial activity.

CONSIDERING it to be unnecessary for the World Assembly to regulate the trade of currency, as standard market price determination is more effective than an international grading system established by WANA;

Market prices and grading systems are apples and oranges.

[Scion Lop On]

There is no reason to categorize resolutions that have already been passed by how much arbitrary good they do. If the World Assembly passed it once, and it still does no harm, there is no reason to repeal. But that's not even the main reason this resolution should not be repealed. This resolution DOES do good. Not only does it safeguard cultural heritage, but it regulates an industry that, when left unattended, gives rise to unfair business practices and fraud.

With all due respect, the fact that a resolution does nothing of importance is, in itself, a reason to repeal. Furthermore, the resolution is seeking to fix a non-problem. By safeguarding currency, you're not preserving culture to any noticeable degree. Also, with all due respect, I can say in all candors that I don't think international accreditation of currency is necessary in preventing fraud in currency trading. Again, I find currency-trading fraud to be a non-problem fitted for the solution the resolution seeks to create.

One of those clauses is not operative and the other hardly qualifies. They have little impact, and serve only to give depth to the resolution.

Preambulatory clauses (as well as the latter of the clauses mentioned in the line you cited) create the argument and premise of the resolution. If both are false, then the resolution's actions are misleading. This is a common tactic used to manipulate WA fluffies.

It is stipulated that the WANA is funded by private donations as well as the World Assembly General Fund. It is not a drain on the Organization's resources by any means. Yet the gains are phenomenal. A whole business is being regulated to promote fair business practices and consumer protection, while safeguarding national history and perhaps more importantly, sovereignty.

That's extremely disingenuous. Private donations will have a miniscule impact, and the rest will be derived from the General Fund, which is funded by mandatory donations by member nation. Furthermore, there are already resolutions in place that protect against fraud and the ilk. All the resolution does is narrowly focus on one aspect of a nation's history which can be done domestically.

This makes no sense. The clause, first of all, does not limit the regulation to this, since it employs the words "such as" before hand. Either way, I'm not sure how it would contravene the resolution's purpose. It should also be noted that in this suggestion, licensed dealers are also included. This is extremely relevant considering this clause refers specifically to taxes, and most nations would not impose taxes on informal commercial activity.

I've actually misread the clause. In reality, the clause is totally toothless, and it's not subclause 4a that contravenes the resolution - rather, it's clause 4. Nation's aren't required to regulate currency sales in accordance with any standard, therefore, nations apathetic towards the "numismatics industry" would likely implement regulations that have little to no impact on sales.

Market prices and grading systems are apples and oranges.

The grading system determines, the market prices, I'm assuming? The grading system will have a direct impact on currency prices, and thus, directly affects the market price.

[Moronist Decisions]

While my boss hasn't got the time to look over this right now, so we may return later, we support the repeal of this abomination.

Kyle Redfern
Secretary III
PA to Dr. Frick

[The Republic of Lanos]

So a tacit endorsement of a one-world currency sounds good? (Yes I know it's illegal to attempt to force that but come on. Unless otherwise, I would think I would see a proposal one of these days promoting adoption of a one-world currency.) This also happens to shield member nations from being forced to adopt a regional currency on the grounds of "Culture, damnit!"

Against.

[Scion Lop On]

So a tacit endorsement of a one-world currency sounds good? (Yes I know it's illegal to attempt to force that but come on. Unless otherwise, I would think I would see a proposal one of these days promoting adoption of a one-world currency.) This also happens to shield member nations from being forced to adopt a regional currency on the grounds of "Culture, damnit!"

Against.

This doesn't do either of those things. At all. The resolution preserves monetary culture, it has nothing to do with one-world currencies, and it doesn't prevent regional currencies. Although I do have to agree with you in the sense that both are a bad idea.

Anywho, the resolution focuses on appreciation, and the WANA's duties reflect that. The resolution's only real stipulations are a museum dedicated to currency in member nations, and optional seminars, as well as accredidation/grading systems of numismatics (which has no affect the economic value of the currency, just the price of privately owned items).

[Grays Harbor]

We can see no compelling reason whatsoever for this repeal other than, honestly, an author who wants his name on a repeal.

[Scion Lop On]

We can see no compelling reason whatsoever for this repeal other than, honestly, an author who wants his name on a repeal.

I've already had my name on a repeal; it's not that exciting, to be quite frank. Although I'm slightly offended that your mistaking the legitimacy of my opinion with selfishness, which is not the case. From what I've seen of your delegation in the past, you seem to be infinitely NatSov, except when it involves culture and the ilk... Either way, you can question our motives all you want, however, please don't post things you're unsure of, especially if it involves the motives of another person, and try to stick with criticism of the draft, not the author.

[Grays Harbor]

We have in the past, and shall continue to post whatever reason we believe appropriate and pertinent. That it "offends" you disturbs us not in the least.

Now, as for your reasons, your spurious and disingenuous assertion that numismatics somehow translates into currency control and manipulation? That is quite laughable, at least it would be if we didn't think you sincerely held that erroneous belief.

[Scion Lop On]

We have in the past, and shall continue to post whatever reason we believe appropriate and pertinent. That it "offends" you disturbs us not in the least.

Now, as for your reasons, your spurious and disingenuous assertion that numismatics somehow translates into currency control and manipulation? That is quite laughable, at least it would be if we didn't think you sincerely held that erroneous belief.

First of all, your "reason" isn't appropriate, because it has absolutely no logical foundation, nor does it have any veracity to which the claim can be proven. To the contrary, you should know better that GAR#56 does very little when it comes to protecting culture, and the repeal focuses on that quite clearly. Unless you've basically revoked your ideologically lately, I'm sensing a bit of pervarication here.

Now, in regards to your second "reason;" perhaps there's a comprehension problem at play? No where in the proposal do I compare numismatics to currency control and manipulation, and to be frank, I'm not even sure how you reached that conclusion. This clause here makes it perfectly lucid that the repeal acknowledges numismatics as the industry of selling currency -

REGRETTING that clause 4 contravenes the intended purpose of the resolution by creating an opt-out for unwilling nations due to a lack of mandatory regulations, aside from the requirement that "World Assembly member nations [regulate] the buying and selling of coins and banknotes," to any degree in which they find acceptable.

- as do the first two preambulatory clauses, and the final preambulatory clause. Of course, if I'm missing the clause you're referring to, please cite it, and I'll change it accordingly.

[Peoples Empire]

my nation and I fully support this draft

[Astrolinium]

I don't feel strongly on this either way. If it gets to vote, I'll probably vote for.
If not, oh well.

-SNIP-

I wonder what Señor Embajador does when a repeal of his only resolution is not being debated - it seems to be the only time I ever see him around these halls.

[Scion Lop On]

While my boss hasn't got the time to look over this right now, so we may return later, we support the repeal of this abomination.

Kyle Redfern
Secretary III
PA to Dr. Frick

my nation and I fully support this draft

I don't feel strongly on this either way. If it gets to vote, I'll probably vote for.
If not, oh well.

Thank you all for your support!

[Warrior Thorin]

You have my support on this legislation.

[Hiraga]

Some people just don't read the original act...

This resolution was put in place as a way to prevent a One World Currency scenario from developing. It's a key shield against globalism. Economies thrive on competing currencies and markets. Repealing this would do too much to allow a OWC scenario to exist in Nation States.

Against.

[Scion Lop On]

Some people just don't read the original act...

This resolution was put in place as a way to prevent a One World Currency scenario from developing.

No. The original does not do that. At all. Please, cite the portion of the original that does that, and I'll gladly drop this whole repeal effort.

The preambulatory clauses of the original explicitly state that this resolution is limited to culture (as does the actual category of the original).

[Unibot II]

I don't get these so-called "National Soverignists", they want to repeal resolutions with teeth on "technical grounds" (excuses to repeal resolutions they don't like) and they want to repeal "good feelings" cultural resolutions too regardless of if they affect their nation. They're more like flat-footed, repealmaniac hypocrites who don't want resolutions that do stuff against National Sovereignty anymore than they want resolutions that do nothing against National Sovereignty.

I've always been a fan of having a few "fluffy" resolutions on the books; some coin collection, an international library, world cultural fairs etc. These things actually promote National Sovereignty and the political integrity of nations -- perhaps this would be more obvious if it was a collection of national flags, but currency is, for our purposes, the same thing. GA#54 makes an individual nation's coin somewhat of an object of pride, which is a good prevention against one currency being adopted internationally.

Sure, I've made fun of GA#54, who hasn't? But I don't see the need to repeal it. Some people are just itching to repeal anything they can see in sight for an unrepealable notch in their belt. I wish you'd go back to finishing that colonialism draft and do some good with the passing of that resolution instead of just repealing any resolution you can articulate why it should be repealed -- if we went on that standard, we'd repeal every resolution and shoot the authors to boot.

[Auralia]

I don't get these so-called "National Soverignists", they want to repeal resolutions with teeth on "technical grounds" (excuses to repeal resolutions they don't like) and they want to repeal "good feelings" cultural resolutions too regardless of if they affect their nation. They're more like flat-footed, repealmaniac hypocrites who don't want resolutions that do stuff against National Sovereignty anymore than they want resolutions that do nothing against National Sovereignty.

I've always been a fan of having a few "fluffy" resolutions on the books; some coin collection, an international library, world cultural fairs etc. These things actually promote National Sovereignty and the political integrity of nations -- perhaps this would be more obvious if it was a collection of national flags, but currency is, for our purposes, the same thing. GA#54 makes an individual nation's coin somewhat of an object of pride, which is a good prevention against one currency being adopted internationally.

Sure, I've made fun of GA#54, who hasn't? But I don't see the need to repeal it. Some people are just itching to repeal anything they can see in sight for an unrepealable notch in their belt. I wish you'd go back to finishing that colonialism draft and do some good with the passing of that resolution instead of just repealing any resolution you can articulate why it should be repealed -- if we went on that standard, we'd repeal every resolution and shoot the authors to boot.

These "fluffy" resolutions come with expenses, you know. We'd rather not pay to maintain a coin collection for every nation.

[Scion Lop On]

I don't get these so-called "National Soverignists", they want to repeal resolutions with teeth on "technical grounds" (excuses to repeal resolutions they don't like) and they want to repeal "good feelings" cultural resolutions too regardless of if they affect their nation. They're more like flat-footed, repealmaniac hypocrites who don't want resolutions that do stuff against National Sovereignty anymore than they want resolutions that do nothing against National Sovereignty.

This doesn't even make any sense. You took the definition of "national sovereignty," and butchered it viciously. National Sovereignists, first and foremost, dislike resolution that are unnecessary at the international level. Secondly, they dislike resolution that do nothing (or very little) while simultaneously costing them money. If a resolution has teeth, that's great, but it's not a criteria for a repeal; however, if the resolution has "teeth," and is destructive or manipulative, then that is grounds for a repeal. If a resolution costs money with added benefit, then that doesn't mean a repeal is in order, but if it does costs money with no added benefit, then that does warrant a repeal. GAR#56 falls into the latter category of both criteria.

I've always been a fan of having a few "fluffy" resolutions on the books; some coin collection, an international library, world cultural fairs etc.

Of the things you listed, one doesn't belong. There's a difference between actually spreading culture through world fairs and coin collecting. The World Assembly Coin Collectors have a non-existent impact on a nation's culture, because most nations that believe numismatics to be culturally important will take action domestically.

These things actually promote National Sovereignty and the political integrity of nations -- perhaps this would be more obvious if it was a collection of national flags, but currency is, for our purposes, the same thing.

No, it doesn't. National Sovereignty means allowing nations to maintain jurisdiction over themselves. It doesn't mean promoting their own cultures or "political integrity." NatSov != Flag-loving nationalist.

GA#54 makes an individual nation's coin somewhat of an object of pride, which is a good prevention against one currency being adopted internationally.

That's an incredibly weak argument. If a nation wants to partake in a one world currency, that's their prerogative, thus, a resolution that doesn't ban one world currencies does nothing to prevent it. If the WA wants to ban a one world currency, then it should do it outright - not through some non-binding, money consuming, seminar advocating resolution that promotes a wildly miniscule portion of a nation's culture.

Sure, I've made fun of GA#54, who hasn't? But I don't see the need to repeal it. Some people are just itching to repeal anything they can see in sight for an unrepealable notch in their belt.

You don't see the need to repeal it because, as you admitted, you like do-nothing, warm-and-fuzzy™ resolutions. This should be repealed because it does nothing, and the fact that you "don't see a need to repeal it" simply because it's harmless reflects that sentiment.

I wish you'd go back to finishing that colonialism draft and do some good with the passing of that resolution instead of just repealing any resolution you can articulate why it should be repealed -- if we went on that standard, we'd repeal every resolution and shoot the authors to boot.

I have no interest in repealing everything. I don't want to take anyone's thunder.

[Quelesh]

GAR56 is, in my opinion, a perfectly okay resolution. It does a relatively small amount of good, for essentially no cost, and there's no need to repeal it.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

[Subgeniustan]

Subgeniustan fully supports this repeal. Our nation has no interest in coin-collecting and we do not see any reason an international body should force individual nations to promote such a pointless hobby. The General Assembly should promote more important things such as Slack, "Bob" Dobbs, and the Church of the SubGenius, rather than this fluff. I say, we melt the coins down for scrap metal and then use it to build statues of J. R. "Bob" Dobbs in all of our nations, to celebrate that wonderful man! The only logical reason I see for coin-collecting is to get a sufficient amount of metal to melt down and sculpt into a statue of "Bob".

[Sciongrad]

GAR56 is, in my opinion, a perfectly okay resolution. It does a relatively small amount of good, for essentially no cost, and there's no need to repeal it.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

The resolution not only establishes a system that provides very little good for a cost, but does so in a way that's unnecessary. Numismatic appreciation can be done (even on the international level) without the WANA funding coin museums and seminars. The resolution's simply too fluffy, and its extravagence is its only appealing quality. The argument that the resolution does more good than it's worth is simply a devious pervarication of the truth.

[Scion Lop On]

Alright, this is currently at the top of my priority list, so unless there are any suggestions (or a compelling reason to believe that this should be abandoned), I'll be submitting this within the week.