NationStates Jolt Archive

I of course edited this be replaceing some terms with variables....
---
(X) Side of the Road
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.


Category: Social Justice
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: X

Description: This proposel is that everyone in the world should drive on the (X) side of the road, opposed to the (Y). This is because it is obviously better and since we have to choose one or the other, this is propsing the (X) hand side! Thank you.
---

And yes, with the exception of the (X) and (Y) and the different writers, even including the spelling errors.

First of all.... is this an issue? Does it really matter?

I assume that the second (Right) was written against the first (Left).

Personally, I think the issue is moot, each nation has a driving standard, which is fine, and they determine which is best. However, if this were to come to vote, I would choose the (Right).... for no other reason that MOST of the planet does drive on the (Right) (In the RL world, 66% of the planet is right, and 34% is left)... so economic impact would be minimalized by conforming to the right.... however, I see no reason for any international conformity here.... in the first place....

I hope the proposal writers can explain themselves....

This issue is far from "moot"! It violates my national sovereignty, my provincial sovereignty, my city sovereignty, my personal, blow-it-out-your-pie-hole sovereignty--it even violates my pet Chihuahua.

It's wrong on so many levels that the UN doesn't enforce the supreme betterness of the left--er, I mean--right side of the road. People need to be guided to this superirorty. We're obviously too dumb to find it on our own, as testified to the continued popularity of Barry Manilow even after it was proven that he, in fact, is not an alien.

We as the high minded, hard-working, be-surfboarded UN membership cannot let this great opportunity pass us by! How would we explain to our children that we passed up only the most 'tubular' pair of proposals that's come by us in at least the last two minutes. We'd be ridiculed by the future generation! Denounced! Called "Old"! We'd be put in museums under the heading "his/her supreme loserdomness"! Are we going to sit back and watch this happen? Are we going to watch as the prestige of this august body goes, respectively, down the drain like all the other floaties?

YES!

I mean, NO!

It is our duty, as members of the international legislative body, to protect the world from evil, imminent destruction, and spandex-laden superheroes. Thus we must approve of these proposals. Help in the fight against terrorism! Rid the world of these pernicious evils of the dual road system and let us once and for all recognize the greatness of the left/right side of the road.

Join with me. For all that’s good, for the liberty of the world life, for cholesterol injected Twinkies, approve these proposals!

How does this proposal "reduce income inequality" or "increase basic welfare"?

If it's still around tomorrow, and there isn't a damn good explination, this sucker is toast.

Besides - and with a typical disregard for the rights of minorities - neither proposal takes account of those who choose to drive in the middle of the road. End the tyranny of the left-right divide!