Drafting legislation to end Economic Slavery

[Bahrainiarhab]

My nation hopes to propose legislation which prevents WA member nations' permittance, encourgement, or implementation of 100% tax rates. N.B. I do not wish to remove the game mechanic of 100% tax. Any nations proficient in drafting WA proposals or those who wish to suggest additions and alterations are invited to post on this forum.

It should probably RECOGNISE that complete garnishment of wages incapicates citizens' means of personal advancement. This perpetuates economic traps or 'glass ceilings' for citizens' throughout these nations. Furthermore, since citizens' work is solely towards an end not of their own design or benefit, it amounts a unique form of forced labour, to be TERMED Economic Slavery. Apart from that I'd rather leave the rest to the pros.

To avoid being ideologically discriminatory, no arbitrary maximum tax rate should be set. Technically, the legislation could permit a tax of 99.999%, if NationStates worked that way. However, countries with tiered tax systems should consider the rate of their highest tax bracket.

I figure that non-compliant nations should be policed by the Security Council, with condemnations serving as warnings. These nations may either choose to issue statements pertaining to future compliance, detailing methods and timeframe, or mediate directly with the Security Council. Although the needs and circumstances of nations should be considered, persistant non-compliance in the forms of filibustering, disregarding Security Council recommendations, etc. should be met with expulsion from the WA.

[Urgench]

OOC. This is a poor idea, it is illegal for a number of reasons. Not least that it represents an Ideological Ban which is not permitted.

That specifications for enforcement might be included within it is also illegal, as a metagaming violation. Besides that is what the gnomes are for.

[Quadrimmina]

I tried this once. If you wanna see it, it's in the thread for illegal resolutions. It's called the "Tax Limitation Stimulus Act".

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Banning 100% tax rates is illegal due to game mechanics regulations. WA resolutions are not technically able to change the way the game works just like that. The consensus has been for the sake of simplicity, tax rates can only be changed uniformly in a particular direction across member states, but this cannot prevent 100% tax rates still.

[Bahrainiarhab]

Just addressing your issues so far...

OOC. This is a poor idea, it is illegal for a number of reasons. Not least that it represents an Ideological Ban which is not permitted.

That specifications for enforcement might be included within it is also illegal, as a metagaming violation. Besides that is what the gnomes are for.

Illegal ideas aren't necessarily poor ones . I specifically tried to consider ideologies, but any ban is inherently restrictive and I can't really figure out which specific ideology it bans. Besides, for those who believe in high taxes (those silly bourgeoisie) a drop of 1% doesn't change much in decision making, gameplay or roleplaying. I will give you the possibility of a meta-gaming violation though, but the gnomes get all the fun and that's why it goes up for vote. Any infringements on rules have no chance getting past the moderators anyway.

Banning 100% tax rates is illegal due to game mechanics regulations. WA resolutions are not technically able to change the way the game works just like that. The consensus has been for the sake of simplicity, tax rates can only be changed uniformly in a particular direction across member states, but this cannot prevent 100% tax rates still.

Sry nope, because, I repeat, I do not wish to remove the game mechanic, otherwise no-one would have the delicious temptation of disobeying it. Can I ask for a rephrase or link on this consensus? Because that sounds more like what our buddy up there is complaining about.

[Mousebumples]

First question: Category and Strength?

Illegal ideas aren't necessarily poor ones . I specifically tried to consider ideologies, but any ban is inherently restrictive and I can't really figure out which specific ideology it bans.

Communist states tend to have 100% tax rates. As such, the outlawing of a 100% tax rate is an ideological ban on communism.

From Rules for GA Proposals:

Ideological Bans
Okay, so you hate capitalism. That's nice, but you can't ban it. Just like you can't ban communism, socialism, democracy, dictatorships, conservatives, liberals, Christians, atheist, or any other political, religious, or economic ideology. While it should go without saying, this is up to the Game Moderator's discretion. You may consider the banning of slavery an oppression of your "economic ideology", we do not.

Sry nope, because, I repeat, I do not wish to remove the game mechanic, otherwise no-one would have the delicious temptation of disobeying it. Can I ask for a rephrase or link on this consensus? Because that sounds more like what our buddy up there is complaining about.

(1) How can a nation disobey a part of THE WAY THE GAME WORKS? "Game mechanics" refers to the game's code. Since no nation (to my knowledge) is able to manually set their tax rate at 12% or 57% or 100% or ... whatever, there is no way for a nation to disobey game mechanics in this regard. Your response lacks logic.

(2) While GA proposals may decrease a nation's tax rate, the fact is that many nations in the WA (and in NS in general) may have calculated tax rates of GREATER than 100%. Certainly, that's impossible to actually collect, so the nation page displays a tax rate of 100%. However, with all of the calculations/etc. that go into creating a nation's tax rate, the tech mods would have to specifically code something for the game to make this proposal "work," should it ever pass. They won't do that, which makes this resolution a Game Mechanics violation.

This proposal is illegal - and no matter how much you wish it weren't the case, that won't change the facts.

Yours,
Ambassador Lizzy Hall
Leader of the Doctoral Monkey Feet of Mousebumples
WA Delegate for Monkey Island

[Unibot]

OOC: I suppose if you really wanted to do us a justice and lower our taxes rates.. you could start by repealing some Social Justice or Education and Creativity proposals, that would lower our taxes rates. Wait no.. I've written in those categories before.. never-mind.

[Bahrainiarhab]

Improvement at last! First answer: Category-Human Rights/Moral decency, Strength-Significant/Strong. Anyone help me pick?

Grumble...Are you guys still ragging on this?

Communist states tend to have 100% tax rates. As such, the outlawing of a 100% tax rate is an ideological ban on communism.

From Rules for GA Proposals:

Ideological Bans
Okay, so you hate capitalism. That's nice, but you can't ban it. Just like you can't ban communism, socialism, democracy, dictatorships, conservatives, liberals, Christians, atheist, or any other political, religious, or economic ideology. While it should go without saying, this is up to the Game Moderator's discretion. You may consider the banning of slavery an oppression of your "economic ideology", we do not.

Operative word: tend. And it even specifically gives the example of slavery being acceptable to ban. Instead of just trying to moderate, maybe some creative input and solutions like a conscientious objection clause would help.

(1) How can a nation disobey a part of THE WAY THE GAME WORKS? "Game mechanics" refers to the game's code. Since no nation (to my knowledge) is able to manually set their tax rate at 12% or 57% or 100% or ... whatever, there is no way for a nation to disobey game mechanics in this regard. Your response lacks logic.

Disobey the law, not the mechanic, as in not avoiding a 100% tax. To lower tax rates just takes a bit of policy manipulation, I never said anything about setting specific tax rates.

(2) While GA proposals may decrease a nation's tax rate, the fact is that many nations in the WA (and in NS in general) may have calculated tax rates of GREATER than 100%. Certainly, that's impossible to actually collect, so the nation page displays a tax rate of 100%. However, with all of the calculations/etc. that go into creating a nation's tax rate, the tech mods would have to specifically code something for the game to make this proposal "work," should it ever pass. They won't do that, which makes this resolution a Game Mechanics violation.

I thought of cases like this, that's why I figured nations could explain their situations in publication or even ask the WA for help.

C'mon guys build upwards.

[Enn]

OOC: Since I renewed my account last September, I've been attempting to reduce my tax rates. They reached 100% about a year aftyer I first started with this nation, and have stayed there ever since. As youcan see on Enn's page, they're still there. So no, it's not just a matter of "lower[ing] tax rates just takes a bit of policy manipulation".

[Bahrainiarhab]

I know, eh? The bloody thing is much easier to raise than lower. It's part of the fun I guess.

[Mousebumples]

Operative word: tend. And it even specifically gives the example of slavery being acceptable to ban. Instead of just trying to moderate, maybe some creative input and solutions like a conscientious objection clause would help.

Slavery is very different from communism. One is a type of government and/or an ideology. Another is a threat to the rights of those individuals who get involved in the slave trade. One has been ruled legal by the mods within legislation (outlawing slavery); one has been ruled illegal by the mods (outlawing any ideology, including - but not limited to - communism).

I don't see any way in which this proposal would be ruled legal. As you may have noted in the rules, repeated submission of illegal proposals can and will get your nation's WA membership revoked. If you would like to continue to pursue this draft, that's certainly your prerogative; however, that does not change the truth regarding its legality.

(1) How can a nation disobey a part of THE WAY THE GAME WORKS? "Game mechanics" refers to the game's code. Since no nation (to my knowledge) is able to manually set their tax rate at 12% or 57% or 100% or ... whatever, there is no way for a nation to disobey game mechanics in this regard. Your response lacks logic.

Disobey the law, not the mechanic, as in not avoiding a 100% tax. To lower tax rates just takes a bit of policy manipulation, I never said anything about setting specific tax rates.

How can the law be disobeyed without changing game mechanics? If you wish for nations to lower their own tax rates, that's their business. However, a proposal mandating a non-100% tax rate for all WA nations does affect (and attempt to alter) game mechanics.

I thought of cases like this, that's why I figured nations could explain their situations in publication or even ask the WA for help.

I ... don't even understand what you just said. What sort of publication are nations supposed to use to "explain their situations" ? And how can they "ask the WA for help" ? The WA is a governing body made up by representatives from thousands of nations. While there is a Secretariat, there is not any one individual (or "governing committee") to whom individual nations can make appeals for assistance/etc. on a general topic. This whole line of reasoning lacks logic and factual basis.

Yours,
Ambassador Lizzy Hall
Leader of the Doctoral Monkey Feet of Mousebumples
WA Delegate for Monkey Island

[Bahrainiarhab]

I don't see any way in which this proposal would be ruled legal. As you may have noted in the rules, repeated submission of illegal proposals can and will get your nation's WA membership revoked. If you would like to continue to pursue this draft, that's certainly your prerogative; however, that does not change the truth regarding its legality.

I appreciate your interest in the legality of the proposal and certainly sending mods an illegal proposal doesn't do anyone much good. However, it may be more appropriate to concern yourself with more pertinent aspects of the draft. I posted here looking for actual forum on the drafting of the piece and would very much enjoy to see the legislation forged into something appropriate, thorough and concurrent with the wants of other nations.

Slavery is very different from communism. One is a type of government and/or an ideology. Another is a threat to the rights of those individuals who get involved in the slave trade. One has been ruled legal by the mods within legislation (outlawing slavery); one has been ruled illegal by the mods (outlawing any ideology, including - but not limited to - communism).

I'm familiar with the differences between slavery and communism. May I highlight that there are REAL communist/market-socialist nations without 100% tax rates.

How can the law be disobeyed without changing game mechanics? If you wish for nations to lower their own tax rates, that's their business. However, a proposal mandating a non-100% tax rate for all WA nations does affect (and attempt to alter) game mechanics.

Can we differentiate between game mechanics, as in the coding of the game, (100% taxes are not being written out of the game) and my initial concern that security council acting as the enforcer of the law could constitute a meta-gaming violation. I'm not looking to lower the taxes of countries per se, if you look at a country with say, 12% or 86% tax, the goal of the legislation wouldn't mandate it lower its taxes.

I... don't even understand what you just said. What sort of publication are nations supposed to use to "explain their situations" ? And how can they "ask the WA for help" ? The WA is a governing body made up by representatives from thousands of nations. While there is a Secretariat, there is not any one individual (or "governing committee") to whom individual nations can make appeals for assistance/etc. on a general topic. This whole line of reasoning lacks logic and factual basis.

In the original post, I stated that in the event of condemnation for the reason of violation, a nation should issue a statement of intended compliance, possibly including a timeframe, goals, reasons for delay, etc. This could be in a forum, possibly to prominent delegates within the assembly or the Secretariat but any better ideas are welcome.

[Flibbleites]

I don't see any way in which this proposal would be ruled legal. As you may have noted in the rules, repeated submission of illegal proposals can and will get your nation's WA membership revoked. If you would like to continue to pursue this draft, that's certainly your prerogative; however, that does not change the truth regarding its legality.

I appreciate your interest in the legality of the proposal and certainly sending mods an illegal proposal doesn't do anyone much good. However, it may be more appropriate to concern yourself with more pertinent aspects of the draft. I posted here looking for actual forum on the drafting of the piece and would very much enjoy to see the legislation forged into something appropriate, thorough and concurrent with the wants of other nations.

I'm confused, what could be more pertinent than this proposal's legality? After all, if this proposal is irredeemably illegal (OOC: I'm not saying it is at this point as I haven't really gone over it thorougly yet) then there's not really any point in continuing to draft it now is there?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[The Most Glorious Hack]

...isn't there an existing Resolution preventing the WA from telling nations how to manage their tax rates?

[Flibbleites]

...isn't there an existing Resolution preventing the WA from telling nations how to manage their tax rates?

Yes there is, WA General Fund, clause 8.

8. Affirms the right of member nations to maintain full authority over domestic taxation policies, barring those that may include unfair discriminatory practices;

[Urgench]

Illegal ideas aren't necessarily poor ones . I specifically tried to consider ideologies, but any ban is inherently restrictive and I can't really figure out which specific ideology it bans. Besides, for those who believe in high taxes (those silly bourgeoisie) a drop of 1% doesn't change much in decision making, gameplay or roleplaying. I will give you the possibility of a meta-gaming violation though, but the gnomes get all the fun and that's why it goes up for vote. Any infringements on rules have no chance getting past the moderators anyway.

OOC (since that's how this started out) No illegal ideas aren't necessarily poor ones but this illegal idea is also a poor one. Communist states technically have 100% tax rates, banning this situation would essentially ban Communism. How much 1% is in this context is irrelevant. Allowing private property of any kind in a totally Communist state is frankly impossible, even as little as 1%.

Confusing RL Market Socialists and Communism for this purpose makes no odds either because in real terms Market Socialism has nothing to do with Communism, whatever the People's Republic of China might like to pretend. In any event what the PRC does in RL is completely irrelevant for NS purposes.

On category, if you submit this under Human Rights, and presuming it wasn't removed from the proposal list for being illegal and wasn't allowed to die by delegates and further presuming that it would ever be voted for by members, it would actually increase government spending since (if I remember correctly) resolutions in that category cause government spending to rise. This would presumably put a ban on 100% tax rates even further beyond practicality, and would probably push many states teetering on the brink of 100% tax rates in to your resolution's red zone, meaning that member states would have to reduce government spending elsewhere (via issue answering) in order to be in compliance. This would in any case be metagaming so therefore would be illegal, and unenforceable.

Another thought occurs, though this resolution does not directly mandate what tax rates should be in member states it does mandate what they should not be, which is effectively the same thing, the WAGF prohibits the WA from interfering in the tax rates of member states, making this resolution illegal on the basis of contradiction of existing legislation. From a philosophical/political perspective this resolution also raises questions regarding Taxation without Representation. The WA does not actually represent the tax payers of its member states and therefore it has extremely questionable legitimacy in seeking to mandate what tax rates within its member states should or should not be. If this resolution is supposed to be about economic self determination then surely it should respect the right of tax payers to have willingly voted for (or otherwise supported) governments which promised to set taxes at 100% no?