We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Pan-Sekowo Freedom Alliance
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 2500
Description[?]:
| Some changes we feel nessesary during these turbulant times. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change
The government's policy regarding foreign embassies.
Old value:: Foreign countries may establish an embassy after obtaining approval from the Foreign Office.
Current: Foreign countries may establish an embassy after obtaining approval from the Foreign Office.
Proposed: Any other country may establish an embassy on national soil.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards giving aid to foreign countries.
Old value:: The government gives moderate aid to countries in need.
Current: The government gives high levels of aid to countries in need.
Proposed: The government supplies "tied" aid to poorer nations in return for trading rights.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:18:06, December 12, 2007 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | No. These measures are ridiculous and unneeded. 1. The Foreign Affairs ministry has remained totally neutral in all of this and will continue to. 2. Giving aid to those in exchange for unfair economic trading rights is totally immoral. |
| Date | 03:38:55, December 12, 2007 CET | From | Pan-Sekowo Freedom Alliance | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | Who said they were unfair? We are already giving them aid, now we are also opening our markets to them, making them self sufficient so they don't have to rely on us economically, they can trade and become rich. Article one was not meant to effect the civil war, rather make us a more open nation. |
| Date | 04:01:02, December 12, 2007 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | The term 'tied aid' means that you give aid in return for access to their markets or resources. Most of the time that means economic exclusivity, unfair trade agreements or some such other immoral thing. |
| Date | 07:03:32, December 12, 2007 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | We are leaning towards the viewpoint of the Democratic Socialists on this issue. We would like to see further reasoned argument before casting a vote. |
| Date | 08:22:48, December 12, 2007 CET | From | Pan-Sekowo Freedom Alliance | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | Trade is a two way word. It means that not only do they get aid from us, they get access to our markets, our resources. They get all the aid they are currently geting, plus an economic relationship with a more developed nation, which will give them more money than they would get other wise. We meanwhile win ourselves a future trading partner, and thus a potential close ally. Its a win win situation where both sides are better off than they would be under the current legislation. The DSP would have you beleive that "trade" means exploitation, when in fact economics is a plus sum game. The DSP is blinded on this issue buy the ideological hatred of the free market that has defined their policy recently. All Nations have a comparitive advantage in certain trade issues, so no trade can be as one sided and exploitational as the DSP would have you beleive. |
| Date | 09:28:33, December 12, 2007 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | We certainly believe that such an act would benefit Sekowo from the trade which would occur. However, historically, underdeveloped nations need protection, not free trade, in order to develop. Historically, where foreign companies have been given free range in underdeveloped nations, this has hurt the local economy and stifled local growth, as local businesses cannot compete with foreign ones. While "trade" does not imply exploitation, in unequal trade situations (where one country desparately needs aid, and the others is well-developed and economically robust), there is often (unintended) exploitation which occurs. We shall vote no until convinced otherwise through concrete example. |
| Date | 21:17:14, December 12, 2007 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the PSFVP Foreign Policy Bill |
| Message | The DSP is not against trade, if we were we would not have been the ones behind Sekowo's Free Trade treaties. We simply believe in Fair Free Trade. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 349 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 401 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: It is possible for a player to transfer ownership of a character or a royal house to another player. This should be done in a public way, such as on the Character Transfers thread, so that if a dispute arises in the future, Moderation can be pointed towards evidence of the transfer. |
| Random quote: "The man who prefers his country before any other duty shows the same spirit as the man who surrenders every right to the state. They both deny that right is superior to authority." - John Dalberg-Acton |