[DRAFT] Let It Snow, Let It Plow

[Eutania]

[The issue] A record snow has covered most of @@NAME@@. But children's delight for snowmen and closed schools is soon ruined as snow cover is several metres high, plunging the roads in sluggish mobility and in many cases total impossibility for the citizens to simply buy groceries or reach their workplaces. Only a handful of advisors have succeded to plow their way into your office, and they're now snowballing your desk with suggestions on what to do.

1) [Patriotic option] "The only way we can get out of this is working together!" says staunch patriot army cadet Robert Downey, as your office @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ flag happens to fly behind him because of the warm airflow coming from the heating grid. "Every single army conscript and public servant should be employed to plow the whole country, from the highways, to the minor pathways. Manpower is not enough? We can make compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all" he mutters while a scenic but totally manly tear drops "We all love @@NAME@@."

Effect: "Dads have never been so enthusiastic about plowing the garden path"

2) [Woke option] "Why is it always about testosterone and army men saying their stupid men stuff in this country?" questions morally-superior feminist Boe Johnsson "Why don't we focus on women's problems for once? We should adopt a gender equal plowing strategy and prioritize paths most used by women such as sidewalks, cycle paths and kindergardens areas. Who cares if big, polluting cars and buses remain stuck? They always get so much attention in this patriarchal society anyway."

Effect: "Women are unable to get tampons as it's impossible to deliver them to the stores"

3) [Colossal and expensive option] "Big problem, big solution" oversimplifies your Minister of Streamlining Things John Goliath. "What we need is a HUGE fleet of HUGE snowplowers with HUGE blades, and the problem will be swept away before you can say "snow". We could even plow the streets early, before people even wake up. Of course it will be expensive, but the economic damage of doing nothing would be far worse".

Effect: "@@DENONYMPLURAL@@ are too scared to go out late when the streets are ravaged by snowplowing tanks"

4) [Laissez-faire solution] "Please, do not remove the snow! We love it" squeals a 6 years old kid while knocking on the window, despite it being on the second floor. "We love doing snowmen, playing outside, schools are closed and dad is finally forced to spend time with me because the car has disappeared under the snow!" He runs away before falling in a hole in the snow.

Effect: "Snowmen manufacturing is at an all-time high"

[End of the issue]

I think that the last option should be excluded since it's basically like pressing the dismiss button, but maybe it could give a blow to the economy and safety in exchange of higher cheerfullness. What do you think?

[Random Country 453632]

This is a very cool issue, no pun intended

[Haganham]

But children's delight for snowmen and closed schools is soon ruined as snow cover is several metres high, plunging the roads in sluggish mobility and in many cases total impossibility for the citizens to simply buy groceries or reach their workplaces.

I don't understand this part. Why would the blockage of snow ruin children's joy? The joy is in the blockage.

I think that the last option should be excluded since it's basically like pressing the dismiss button, but maybe it could give a blow to the economy and safety in exchange of higher cheerfulness. What do you think?

Having a policy of not removing snow is different from not having a policy on snow removal.

Anyway this is a great topic

[USS Monitor]

This draft is not a realistic representation of snow removal IMO.

Temp agencies offer work cleaning up after large storms, but the biggest challenge is not manpower. It's having the right equipment. If you look at snow-related disasters in the US, the most severe problems do not happen in the North where there is heavy snowfall. They happen in the South where people are not prepared to cope with the snow. It might only be 6 inches of snow, but if it hits a Southern town that has no plows, it can take a while before they get their roads clear.

If you get a lot of snow, it is possible to get a point where the plows have no room to pile the snow. However, more people plowing won't solve this. The way you fix it is to have trucks collect the snow and drive it out of the cities. You need dump trucks, not conscription.

Option 2 is based on sexist generalizations that are too far removed from reality. Women drive cars and ride buses. I am a woman who lives in New England, and I have never heard anyone advocate that sidewalks need to be cleared before roads. It's just not a real position. Roads are easier to plow, they are used by emergency vehicles such as ambulances, and they can be used over longer distances than a sidewalk. If the sidewalks are not cleared, people just walk in the street. Most people who ride their bike in the snow are men, at least around here.

Try to have options that are more directly related to the situation at hand. If you want to bring in an environmentalist angle, you could talk about the use of salt or other chemicals to melt ice off roads and sidewalks. The salt washes into the environment, like rivers and lakes.

Also, try to make it a little clearer why this is being addressed by the national government instead of handled by various local governments.

[Random Country 453632]

This draft is not a realistic representation of snow removal IMO.

Temp agencies offer work cleaning up after large storms, but the biggest challenge is not manpower. It's having the right equipment. If you look at snow-related disasters in the US, the most severe problems do not happen in the North where there is heavy snowfall. They happen in the South where people are not prepared to cope with the snow. It might only be 6 inches of snow, but if it hits a Southern town that has no plows, it can take a while before they get their roads clear.

If you get a lot of snow, it is possible to get a point where the plows have no room to pile the snow. However, more people plowing won't solve this. The way you fix it is to have trucks collect the snow and drive it out of the cities. You need dump trucks, not conscription.

Option 2 is based on sexist generalizations that are too far removed from reality. Women drive cars and ride buses. I am a woman who lives in New England, and I have never heard anyone advocate that sidewalks need to be cleared before roads. It's just not a real position. Roads are easier to plow, they are used by emergency vehicles such as ambulances, and they can be used over longer distances than a sidewalk. If the sidewalks are not cleared, people just walk in the street. Most people who ride their bike in the snow are men, at least around here.

Try to have options that are more directly related to the situation at hand. If you want to bring in an environmentalist angle, you could talk about the use of salt or other chemicals to melt ice off roads and sidewalks. The salt washes into the environment, like rivers and lakes.

Also, try to make it a little clearer why this is being addressed by the national government instead of handled by various local governments.

Have to agree on this one. You should also take into hand what the general logic of society would do.

[Umbratellus]

Option 2 is based on sexist generalizations that are too far removed from reality. Women drive cars and ride buses. I am a woman who lives in New England, and I have never heard anyone advocate that sidewalks need to be cleared before roads. It's just not a real position. Roads are easier to plow, they are used by emergency vehicles such as ambulances, and they can be used over longer distances than a sidewalk. If the sidewalks are not cleared, people just walk in the street. Most people who ride their bike in the snow are men, at least around here.

It's actually not removed from reality at all. If I had to guess, the original poster is making a reference to the country of Sweden, where gender neutral snowplowing is a very serious issue. Here is one article (and other from the US in case you are not convinced) about it; there are many others out there stretching back to at least 2013 from what I have seen.

As for the issue itself, one thing that immediately stood out to me:

We can make compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all" he mutters while a scenic but totally manly tear drops "We all love @@NAME@@."

that line in particular bugged me, here's a few bolded suggestions:

We can make it compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all," he mutters while a stoic but totally manly tear drops, "We all love @@NAME@@."

[Eutania]

This draft is not a realistic representation of snow removal IMO.

Temp agencies offer work cleaning up after large storms, but the biggest challenge is not manpower. It's having the right equipment. If you look at snow-related disasters in the US, the most severe problems do not happen in the North where there is heavy snowfall. They happen in the South where people are not prepared to cope with the snow. It might only be 6 inches of snow, but if it hits a Southern town that has no plows, it can take a while before they get their roads clear.

If you get a lot of snow, it is possible to get a point where the plows have no room to pile the snow. However, more people plowing won't solve this. The way you fix it is to have trucks collect the snow and drive it out of the cities. You need dump trucks, not conscription.

Option 2 is based on sexist generalizations that are too far removed from reality. Women drive cars and ride buses. I am a woman who lives in New England, and I have never heard anyone advocate that sidewalks need to be cleared before roads. It's just not a real position. Roads are easier to plow, they are used by emergency vehicles such as ambulances, and they can be used over longer distances than a sidewalk. If the sidewalks are not cleared, people just walk in the street. Most people who ride their bike in the snow are men, at least around here.

Try to have options that are more directly related to the situation at hand. If you want to bring in an environmentalist angle, you could talk about the use of salt or other chemicals to melt ice off roads and sidewalks. The salt washes into the environment, like rivers and lakes.

Also, try to make it a little clearer why this is being addressed by the national government instead of handled by various local governments.

The issue is exactly about tackling lack of equipment and general readiness, so it makes sense. If NS took each nation climate into account as a parameter I would exclude arctic nations since they already know how to deal with it.
Option 2 is based on what the Swedes did in reality in Stockholm as gender equal snowplowing, and it caused hardships for the inhabitants (https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gende ... paralyzed/). I'm sorry if the way I wrote it looks sexist it wasn't my intention, I just attempted to avoid taking too seriously any of the sides.
Your suggestion about salt damage to the environment is good and I will try to add an option about it, I just need to find a way to fit it into the storytelling of the issue or integrating it into option 3.

[Eutania]

As for the issue itself, one thing that immediately stood out to me:

We can make compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all" he mutters while a scenic but totally manly tear drops "We all love @@NAME@@."

that line in particular bugged me, here's a few bolded suggestions:

We can make it compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all," he mutters while a stoic but totally manly tear drops, "We all love @@NAME@@."

Fixed, thanks!

But children's delight for snowmen and closed schools is soon ruined as snow cover is several metres high, plunging the roads in sluggish mobility and in many cases total impossibility for the citizens to simply buy groceries or reach their workplaces.

I don't understand this part. Why would the blockage of snow ruin children's joy? The joy is in the blockage.

I think that the last option should be excluded since it's basically like pressing the dismiss button, but maybe it could give a blow to the economy and safety in exchange of higher cheerfulness. What do you think?

Having a policy of not removing snow is different from not having a policy on snow removal.

Anyway this is a great topic

How about: "But children's delight for snowmen and closed schools comes with adults' utter dismay as snow cover is several metres high, plunging the roads in sluggish mobility and in many cases total impossibility for the citizens to simply buy groceries or reach their workplaces."

If this issue passes the review of this thread, I will include option 4 anyway then.

[USS Monitor]

Option 2 is based on sexist generalizations that are too far removed from reality. Women drive cars and ride buses. I am a woman who lives in New England, and I have never heard anyone advocate that sidewalks need to be cleared before roads. It's just not a real position. Roads are easier to plow, they are used by emergency vehicles such as ambulances, and they can be used over longer distances than a sidewalk. If the sidewalks are not cleared, people just walk in the street. Most people who ride their bike in the snow are men, at least around here.

It's actually not removed from reality at all. If I had to guess, the original poster is making a reference to the country of Sweden, where gender neutral snowplowing is a very serious issue. Here is one article (and other from the US in case you are not convinced) about it; there are many others out there stretching back to at least 2013 from what I have seen.

As for the issue itself, one thing that immediately stood out to me:

We can make compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all" he mutters while a scenic but totally manly tear drops "We all love @@NAME@@."

that line in particular bugged me, here's a few bolded suggestions:

We can make it compulsory for able-bodied civilians to join in the national effort. After all," he mutters while a stoic but totally manly tear drops, "We all love @@NAME@@."

No.

Your own sources -- which are pretty fringe in the first place -- say women use public transit (i.e. BUSES) more than men, and they talk about plowing STREETS that women are likely to drive on. That's not what this option is.

You'll notice that my complaint wasn't: you need to clear the highways so commuters can drive to work. My complaint was: you need to clear roads (not specifically highways, but roads generally) so emergency vehicles like ambulances can get around. The option is indiscriminately against roads and motor vehicles of all types, regardless of where they go -- unless it's a kindergarten, because clearly kindergarteners are the only kids that need to go to school, and nobody ever needs to go to a middle school or a high school. The logic given is not to reduce slips and falls on icy sidewalks. It is because cars and buses pollute. That is not a real feminist position. It is an offensive sexist caricature.

This draft is not a realistic representation of snow removal IMO.

Temp agencies offer work cleaning up after large storms, but the biggest challenge is not manpower. It's having the right equipment. If you look at snow-related disasters in the US, the most severe problems do not happen in the North where there is heavy snowfall. They happen in the South where people are not prepared to cope with the snow. It might only be 6 inches of snow, but if it hits a Southern town that has no plows, it can take a while before they get their roads clear.

If you get a lot of snow, it is possible to get a point where the plows have no room to pile the snow. However, more people plowing won't solve this. The way you fix it is to have trucks collect the snow and drive it out of the cities. You need dump trucks, not conscription.

Option 2 is based on sexist generalizations that are too far removed from reality. Women drive cars and ride buses. I am a woman who lives in New England, and I have never heard anyone advocate that sidewalks need to be cleared before roads. It's just not a real position. Roads are easier to plow, they are used by emergency vehicles such as ambulances, and they can be used over longer distances than a sidewalk. If the sidewalks are not cleared, people just walk in the street. Most people who ride their bike in the snow are men, at least around here.

Try to have options that are more directly related to the situation at hand. If you want to bring in an environmentalist angle, you could talk about the use of salt or other chemicals to melt ice off roads and sidewalks. The salt washes into the environment, like rivers and lakes.

Also, try to make it a little clearer why this is being addressed by the national government instead of handled by various local governments.

The issue is exactly about tackling lack of equipment, so it makes sense.

A place that gets several meters of snow would already have some equipment. It could happen in a place that usually gets several inches instead of several meters, but it's unrealistic that it would happen in a place that usually doesn't get snow.

[Eutania]

No.

Your own sources -- which are pretty fringe in the first place -- say women use public transit (i.e. BUSES) more than men, and they talk about plowing STREETS that women are likely to drive on. That's not what this option is.

You'll notice that my complaint wasn't: you need to clear the highways so commuters can drive to work. My complaint was: you need to clear roads (not specifically highways, but roads generally) so emergency vehicles like ambulances can get around. The option is indiscriminately against roads and motor vehicles of all types, regardless of where they go -- unless it's a kindergarten, because clearly kindergarteners are the only kids that need to go to school, and nobody ever needs to go to a middle school or a high school. The logic given is not to reduce slips and falls on icy sidewalks. It is because cars and buses pollute. That is not a real feminist position. It is an offensive sexist caricature.

A less fringe source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/s ... -1.4500636
They encouraged use of public transportation at the expense of cars by giving less priority to streets more used by cars, which in turn inevitably penalizes trucks and emergency vehicles too. According to the article "It's an attempt to spend more public dollars on women, who are more likely to travel by foot, bicycle or public transportation". If you think it's a sexist prejudice, blame them and not me just because I'm making a satire about them.
I understand that not all feminists want certain roads to be cleared before others and if a handful of Canadians and Swedish feminists have those opinions in real (and you clearly don't agree with them) I can't do anything about it if not joking about it.