NationStates Jolt Archive

First, here's a link to the previous drafting thread:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=445000

Second, I submitted the following proposal, "Representation in Taxation" yesterday, without a telegram campaign. Any suggestions questions comments or such are welcome as I will likely not start actively campaigning until next tuesday. (After that time, the comments and questions, etc. are still welcome, but the situation would be such that it might be hard to change the proposal in response to quality observation at that point).

Representation in Taxation
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: The Furtherment of Democracy || Strength: Significant || Proposed by: Powerhungry Chipmunks

Description: The General Assembly of the United Nations

RECOGNIZING the diversity of individual nations’ peoples, cultures, political leanings, governmental systems, and economic situations, and the fundamental need for each person or group of people being able to express those unique characteristics,

SUPPORTING the view of many that democracy and its precepts (fair representation, and political license among them) can both address and categorize these disparate situations, attitudes, and lives more justly than any other system of government,

ASSERTING that substantially fairer representation and greater political license (prerequisites to democracy) accompanies ‘local governance’ (that those most closely involved with and knowledgeable of an issue address it), except on issues in which overarching, external intervention is necessary,

BELIEVING as impossible for an individual citizen in a member nation to receive a fair form of representation in taxation legislation made on a UN level,

DETERMINING, in the interest of fair representation and greater democratic freedoms, that taxation of national, domestic activities and products is best dealt with, at highest, by national government:

1.FIRMLY ENCOURAGES member nations to allow citizens the highest degrees of representation regarding the taxes incurred upon them, SUGGESTING each member nation and citizens in that nation regularly and soberly scrutinize their respective taxation system, specifically to understand its effects on economic liberty and social equality, and its general service to nations’ peoples;

2.DECLARES and PROTECTS, as inviolable rights of nations:
(a) imposing or not imposing of taxes or fees on domestic activities, items, and businesses within their national boundaries, and
(b) the determination of rate, general type (progressive, flat, etc.) and specific application of such taxes (who/what is and is not taxed);

3.DEFINES “taxes or fees on domestic activities, items, and businesses” as including, but not limited to:
(a) fees for national postal service, copy fees for national documents, and admissions for national parks or natural recreation activities, as well as tolls for roads within a member nations borders,
(b) taxes imposed upon businesses which engage in strictly intra-national trade, and taxes imposed on items and services which are made and sold strictly within a member nation, and
(c) taxes placed upon (or tax credits awarded) farmers which sell their crops strictly within the nation and taxes placed upon (or tax credits awarded) government workers;

4.ALLOWS that member nations may voluntarily relinquish all or part of their rights to determining their taxation systems to local, region, and international groups (such as an international economic alliance) if a member nation so decides;

5.URGES that nations use this right to tax their peoples with responsibility, and, most importantly, with consent and approval from the people who are taxed, NOTING that unjust governments are often punished economically, politically, and militarily by other governments as well as by those whom they oppress.


Approvals: 23 (Aris-Connistan, Love and esterel, Shamm, Agramerland, Trantorsja, Eve the First, WZ Forums, Jey, Onahere, Flibbleites, Of Cascadia, Gaiah, Republic of Freedonia, The 1st Kemdoph Army, Marion Oaks 2, Baudrillard, Cruor Corbin, Pharan, Elika, Punrovia, Brocklandia, Chaucerin, Scandinavian Duchies)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 105 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Fri Sep 30 2005

good luck, we really hope your proposition will pass

just a question about "submitting strategy", feel free not to answer to me:

do you always submit a proposition the 1 st time without campaigning, just to sound and to collect suggestions?

just a question about "submitting strategy", feel free not to answer to me:

do you always submit a proposition the 1 st time without campaigning, just to sound and to collect suggestions?
No, this is sort of a first for me. The advantage of this is two-fold, 1) you might get responses from posters who only seem to want to grouse about your proposal after you've submitted it (don't ask me why, there are always a few of them) and 2) you get a small list of delegates who have a history of supporting your proposal, which, in theory, should make a telegram campaign easier.

I usually just lace up my walking boots and cold call all the way to quorum, having to shed late-coming critics with much duress. Hopefully this will cut down on the blisters and the, er, blisters. :)

No, this is sort of a first for me. The advantage of this is two-fold, 1) you might get responses from posters who only seem to want to grouse about your proposal after you've submitted it (don't ask me why, there are always a few of them) and 2) you get a small list of delegates who have a history of supporting your proposal, which, in theory, should make a telegram campaign easier.

I usually just lace up my walking boots and cold call all the way to quorum, having to shed late-coming critics with much duress. Hopefully this will cut down on the blisters and the, er, blisters. :)


thanks for your answer
i think the new way you operate to submit a proposal is very interesting ;)

For each of my 2 resolution where i'am the author, someone send me after my campaign a telegram with a very good suggestion for the 1st and a good critic for the second, i didn't have the courage to ask mods to delete them and to begin a campaign again
=> i feel bad that my 2 resolutions could have ben better and that i couldn't really do something about it now :(

When and how did the NSUN obtain taxation power?

Of course, the UN would charge and and collect dues from member states, but that's not really a tax, right?

Regardless, the good people of Discordinia would get behind a resolution recognizing the right of an individual's right to representation at or in any governing body when said governing body levies any tax upon said individual.

The good people of Discordinia would also recognize the right of an individual to reject such notions entirely and exist outside of the structured societal matrix. For reference, see the early work of Robert Nozick and all writings by Hakim Bey.

Good luck!

Cookie I, El Jefe

When and how did the NSUN obtain taxation power?

Of course, the UN would charge and and collect dues from member states, but that's not really a tax, right?Actually, from what I understand, a lot of people disagree with the UN collecting dues (both that it does, and that it should).

The first piece of evidence about the UN and memeber nations' fiscal relationship is that there is nothing mentioned, it gameplay, or in plain ol' description that the UN collects dues from member nations. Many claim that the game is made up of only what is stated in the FAQ, etc. and hold the idea of dues in contempt.

However, there has, very often, been question raised about how the UN funds itself, its committees and its various initiatives. And many nations (possibly the earliest being Stephistan, according to NSWiki) have attempted to correlate the NSUN very closely with the RL UN and realism, which quite obviously would make the UN collect dues.

It's part of a longstanding debate owver how the UN functions: in accordance with RL conventions, or as more of a vessel for Max's satire (dictated by, say, the FAQ)?

Anyway, I don't really want to get into it. This proposal doesn't really have much to do about the UN collecting a tax from nations, but rather about the UN not telling member nations how to collect taxes and what taxes to collect.

Ausserland believes this is an excellent and well-crafted proposal. We will certainly vote in favor of it should it come to a vote.

We do have one quibble with the resolution. That concerns the definition of “taxes or fees on domestic activities, items, and businesses” as "...taxes imposed upon businesses which engage in strictly intra-national trade, and taxes imposed on items and services which are made and sold strictly within a member nation...."

As we see it, this excludes taxes on profits made by multinational corporations through their operations within a nation and taxes on imported goods. This isn't a fatal flaw by any means, since such taxation isn't prohibited by the proposal. We simply would prefer to see these things protected along with taxes imposed on strictly domestic corporations and products. In case we've managed to confuse everyone, here are two examples:

The Flubdub Corporation is a small business which operates solely within Nation A. The right of Nation A to tax their profits is guaranteed by the proposal. The Megalith Corporation is a huge multinational which provides services in Nation A and 34 other countries. The proposal does not guarantee Nation A's right to tax the Megalith Corporation's profits from their operations in Nation A.

Nation B's domestic industries produce a large number of widgets (very popular with B consumers, it seems). An equally large number of widgets are imported from other countries. The proposal guarantees Nation B's right to impose sales taxes on the products produced within the nation, but not on the imported products.

As we noted earlier, we are very much in favor of this proposal. We're simply puzzled by what we see as a logical disconnect. We hope the distinguished representative of Powerhungry Chipmunks will enlighten us as to the rationale behind the definition.

Patrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

We will support this proposal in any way we can.

We do have one quibble with the resolution. That concerns the definition of “taxes or fees on domestic activities, items, and businesses” as "...taxes imposed upon businesses which engage in strictly intra-national trade, and taxes imposed on items and services which are made and sold strictly within a member nation...."

As we see it, this excludes taxes on profits made by multinational corporations through their operations within a nation and taxes on imported goods. This isn't a fatal flaw by any means, since such taxation isn't prohibited by the proposal. We simply would prefer to see these things protected along with taxes imposed on strictly domestic corporations and products. In case we've managed to confuse everyone, here are two examples:

The Flubdub Corporation is a small business which operates solely within Nation A. The right of Nation A to tax their profits is guaranteed by the proposal. The Megalith Corporation is a huge multinational which provides services in Nation A and 34 other countries. The proposal does not guarantee Nation A's right to tax the Megalith Corporation's profits from their operations in Nation A.

Nation B's domestic industries produce a large number of widgets (very popular with B consumers, it seems). An equally large number of widgets are imported from other countries. The proposal guarantees Nation B's right to impose sales taxes on the products produced within the nation, but not on the imported products.

As we noted earlier, we are very much in favor of this proposal. We're simply puzzled by what we see as a logical disconnect. We hope the distinguished representative of Powerhungry Chipmunks will enlighten us as to the rationale behind the definition.
First, I'm grateful for Ausserland bringing this up because it lets me point out large differences between NSoT and this proposal. Thanks :)

Well, to explain my rationale I think we should remember what this proposal is protecting. It's protecting the right for nations to decide certain taxes. Possibly the only other body which would be controlling these taxes would be the UN. So, essentially this proposal and NSoT were (at least I was attempting in them both) protecting nations right to decide taxes from the UN. I fear that some in the UN might not realize that these proposals were not trying to protect the right of nations to tax, in general, per se. But, rather, they were just trying to limit unilateralism by the UN (y'know: All Un nations must tax this item and not tax this item) on domestic issues.

Now, we must remember NSoT, which pretty much included multinational corporations and such in the taxes it "protected from the UN". In fact, I believe it stopped the the UN from determining any taxes in member nations (or so I thought). This was met with a lot of opposition, because there may be some good in the UN having some hand in international trade, or in monitoring certain taxes in member nations. So, in accordance with those that felt NSoT was over-reaching, I repealed NSoT and am now attempting to replace it. So, the big reason I didn't include multinational corporations is, frankly, because a lot of UN members seem to think the UN should be able to monitor taxes on international trade.

One thing we might be getting confused on is whether nations can tax multinational corporations in their borders if this proposal passes. The answer is "yes", just as well as they can tax them now. If this proposal passes, the difference between intranational and multinational corporations will be how much the UN can tell nations how to tax them. I don't necessarily see a problem with allowing the UN, at some future point, to advise nations in taxing some multinational corporations. So I left it out and it remains an area that the UN can have a say in what nations tax.

I hope this explains my rationale. If not, please, please ask me to clarify. I wrote all of this fairly quickly and might full-well not be making sense.

We thank the distinguished representative of Powerhungry Chipmunks for the explanation. We fully understand that the proposal is silent on such matters as taxing internally-generated profits of multi-nationals and imported goods, and thus the status quo is maintained. We still see this as a logical disconnect, but we appreciate the need to accommodate the political realities of the NSUN. Nothing wrong with that.

We will certainly be voting in favor of the proposal should it reach the floor.

Pstrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

So long as the NSUN is not collecting taxes ... and perhaps the good people of Discordinia were simply confused by this portion of the proposal:

BELIEVING as impossible for an individual citizen in a member nation to receive a fair form of representation in taxation legislation made on a UN level

Regardless, after carefully re-reading the proposal the good people of Discordinia are satisfied, and would more than willingly vote in favor of this resolution. We will encourage our regional delegate to vote in favor of the proposal.

All Hail Eris!

Cookie I, El Jefe

I have submitted the proposal (with telegram campaign this time). And I wholeheartedly thank all those who have said positive things about this proposal.

If you'd like to support the proposal, it can be found at this link (until it expires or reaches quorum).

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/30803/page=UN_proposal1/match=representation%20in%20taxation

Thank you for your time.

I have resubmitted "Representation in Taxation", and will soon be contacting delegates who have approved the proposal previously. Again the proposal can be found at the following address, throughout it's stint in the proposal list:

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/30803/page=UN_proposal1/match=representation%20in%20taxation


Please approve this proposal, and help keep representation in the taxation of citizens.

Approved. I especially like articles 2 and 3.

approved also

We have approved your proposal, good luck.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

We will ask our delegate to approve it. It's about time we had a proposal at vote we could actually vote for.

The people of Cluichstan have also approved this proposal.

ooc: how do you approve a proposal if you agree to it?

OOC: Only regional delgates can approve. You must be a reigional delgate.

You have to be a delegate. Your delegate, Noctaurus, will almost certainly be contacted by telegram asking for his support.

In your case...you don't. Only delegates can approve proposals. I don't know what the system is in Gatesville, but in some regions, there is a place on off-site forums where UN residents can suggest proposals that they would like their delegate to approve. If you like this one, you should contact your delegate for approval.

i will be bringing this to my delegates attention and thanks for the quick response to my question.

we have a UN section in our forum where members debate ideas, proposals etc so once i've given this a good read it may well be posted there.

I realise I am opening up myself to a huge amount of mocking, but what does this actually do?

I have read it, and I think I get it, but... well it doesn't seem to do anything. But I have too much respect for Powerhungry Chipmunks to assume he/she would submit a worthless proposal, so I figure I am missing something :}

I realise I am opening up myself to a huge amount of mocking, but what does this actually do?
It tells the UN that it can't tell it's members how to tax their citizens.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

It tells the UN that it can't tell it's members how to tax their citizens.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Oh.

Then I am all for it :}

I have resubmitted "Representation in Taxation", and will soon be contacting delegates who have approved the proposal previously. Again the proposal can be found at the following address, throughout it's stint in the proposal list:

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/30803/page=UN_proposal1/match=representation%20in%20taxation


Please approve this proposal, and help keep representation in the taxation of citizens.

I'd like to thank the 80 delegates who've approved this so far. And encourage more approving.

Thank you for your time,

Powerhungry Chipmunks

With only 9 approvals yet to be collected (and until tomorrow night EDT to do it), I'm feeling more confident that this will reach quorum and come to vote. I'm also swelling with appreciation for those who have approved it, and who have enlisted their support.

Should it come to vote, I'm going to create a new thread with a poll for the debate/discussion of the proposal.