NationStates Jolt Archive

The nation of Sarcodina has tried to supported passing resolutions to stop "tax strangling" (tax rates so high, people can't make any decisions by themselves...ex 100% tax rate etc.) to the UN members. The first time, a while ago, the moderators said it was not allowed because it changed game rules. But then I stated that UN propsosals all ready have the ability to change one's tax rate so it is not changing anything and by the fact my proposal died in proposal list (was not taken out), I thought the moderators accepted by idea. Then quite recently I did something quite similar, but my proposal was taken off the list and I was sent a telegram stating it was not allowed. Now I have looked through the well done but extremely long cogition's "a case study in deleted proposals" and did not find one example similar to my proposal (addressing the tax rate by it self...not for example "cutting military spending" or "increasing enviromental spending".)
So my question is why can taxes not be altered in UN proposals?

Hope everyone has a happy thanksgiving too...

The nation of Sarcodina has tried to supported passing resolutions to stop "tax strangling" (tax rates so high, people can't make any decisions by themselves...ex 100% tax rate etc.) to the UN members. The first time, a while ago, the moderators said it was not allowed because it changed game rules. But then I stated that UN propsosals all ready have the ability to change one's tax rate so it is not changing anything and by the fact my proposal died in proposal list (was not taken out), I thought the moderators accepted by idea. Then quite recently I did something quite similar, but my proposal was taken off the list and I was sent a telegram stating it was not allowed. Now I have looked through the well done but extremely long cogition's "a case study in deleted proposals" and did not find one example similar to my proposal (addressing the tax rate by it self...not for example "cutting military spending" or "increasing enviromental spending".)
So my question is why can taxes not be altered in UN proposals?

Hope everyone has a happy thanksgiving too...

Happy Thanksgiving to you, too. :)

I have a couple of questions. What category did you propose this under? How did you word it? Could you post a copy of it here?

I am unfortuantely due to its quick deletion do not have the one I did recently but this is the old proposal. It was listed under social justice because my and the proposal's belief is too high taxes causes hinderance of social movement.
Also, the tax reduction that it proposes is obliviously not permenant because UN proposals only effect the current UN members. And after it would hypothetically go into affect it could be changed by later legislation.

Title: Socially Just Tax Proposal
Seeing that many nations in the UN have taxes of up to 60-100% that have crippled personal thought and invention,
Whereas the people of these nations are unable to pay for anything the government does not supply,
Whereas, work becomes irrelevant due to the lack of money in return thus creating states with workforces of apathetic drones whom must be threatened to work.
And being that the UN should not support total lack of social mobility thus causing things such as censorship, oppression, and life threatening poverty etc…
I call for a resolution for UN’s member to have a tax rate at the MAXIMUM of 60%; therefore, all nations with higher rate will be changed to a flat 60% tax rate.
For if people have absolutely no ability to decide where any of their monies go there will be no true freedom and no trace of real Democracy and basic decency in the world

I am unfortuantely due to its quick deletion do not have the one I did recently but this is the old proposal. It was listed under social justice because my and the proposal's belief is too high taxes causes hinderance of social movement.
Also, the tax reduction that it proposes is obliviously not permenant because UN proposals only effect the current UN members. And after it would hypothetically go into affect it could be changed by later legislation.

Title: Socially Just Tax Proposal
Seeing that many nations in the UN have taxes of up to 60-100% that have crippled personal thought and invention,
Whereas the people of these nations are unable to pay for anything the government does not supply,
Whereas, work becomes irrelevant due to the lack of money in return thus creating states with workforces of apathetic drones whom must be threatened to work.
And being that the UN should not support total lack of social mobility thus causing things such as censorship, oppression, and life threatening poverty etc…
I call for a resolution for UN’s member to have a tax rate at the MAXIMUM of 60%; therefore, all nations with higher rate will be changed to a flat 60% tax rate.
For if people have absolutely no ability to decide where any of their monies go there will be no true freedom and no trace of real Democracy and basic decency in the world

Wow! It's no wonder they tossed it. That resolution would require some serious coding. That's probably why it got deleted. Sal would have probably had to make significant changes to the game mechanics.

Good proposal idea, though. I just think that Free Trade would have been a more appropriate category for it.

They actually did not toss this one originally (the one above.) I understand that gamecode gets changed in resolutions but when do they draw the line? Is that in some other thread?
Also the reason it should not be free trade is because it is not really dealing with trade...but thanks for the kind words anyway.

While Resolutions may cause the reduction of a nation's tax rate, your proposal just can't work. It creates an internal conflict. Maj. Fault would be popping up and snarling.

Consider: If your resolution passed, all UN nations would be forced to have a tax rate no higher than 60%. So, how would this happen? It would have to be coding. The game would have to go and make sure that no UN nation had tax above 60% and make sure that no future nation has greater than 60%, presumably via forced reduction on joining. Clearly the game can't do this without a massive reworking of the game code. Without the code being changed, the Resolution would do absolutely nothing, as there'd still be nations with 61%+ tax rates. It would have just as much affect as the removed Resolution demanding proper spelling and grammar in UN proposals (that is: none).

Furthermore, if this proposal would be possible, it certainly isn't 'Social Justice'. It doesn't "reduce income inequality" (100% tax rate means everyone's income is perfectly equal: $0.00), nor does it "increase basic welfare" as it would likely lower welfare.

While Resolutions may cause the reduction of a nation's tax rate, your proposal just can't work. It creates an internal conflict. Maj. Fault would be popping up and snarling.

Consider: If your resolution passed, all UN nations would be forced to have a tax rate no higher than 60%. So, how would this happen? It would have to be coding. The game would have to go and make sure that no UN nation had tax above 60% and make sure that no future nation has greater than 60%, presumably via forced reduction on joining. Clearly the game can't do this without a massive reworking of the game code. Without the code being changed, the Resolution would do absolutely nothing, as there'd still be nations with 61%+ tax rates. It would have just as much affect as the removed Resolution demanding proper spelling and grammar in UN proposals (that is: none).

Furthermore, if this proposal would be possible, it certainly isn't 'Social Justice'. It doesn't "reduce income inequality" (100% tax rate means everyone's income is perfectly equal: $0.00), nor does it "increase basic welfare" as it would likely lower welfare.


I agree with your concept of reducing income inequality. However, at 100%, what you described would be an oxymoron. No income would exist.

I agree with your concept of reducing income inequality. However, at 100%, what you described would be an oxymoron. No income would exist.

Isn't Nation States grand? You should see the number of nations with 100% tax.

I agree with your concept of reducing income inequality. However, at 100%, what you described would be an oxymoron. No income would exist.
If there's no income, everyone is equal. It's rather ad absurdium, but still...