NationStates Jolt Archive

Are you allowed to represent a real life law? I don't mean word to word but say a Bankcrupcy bill (mild free trade) stating that:

1) Any industry in debt that has declared itself will get immediate funding to the sum of whatever is needed to pay wages for its staff for the immediate future.
2) The staff's pensions will be paid up to the value of 80%

This will give Industry a boost by allowing non-profitable companies to dip in and out of bankcrupcy without affecting staff

1) Any industry in debt that has declared itself will get immediate funding to the sum of whatever is needed to pay wages for its staff for the immediate future.


Why is this a UN issue if the Hula Hoop Industry in your nation goes bankrup? why should my nation be involved here in bailing it out.. ?

The same would be true if say our Frisbe Industry goes under..! This is up to individual nations to handle..!

This says nothing about who will pay for it......!?! Or did I miss something here...?!?

UN-sponsored corporate welfare to support companies that consumers have rejected? I don't think so.

As we have previously stated, the good people of Discordinia, much like the good people of Omigodtheykilledkenny, strongly disapprove of corporate welfare, especially of the shameless kind that would be promoted by this resolution.

Bail out your own damn businesses.

All Hail Eris!

Cookie I, El Jefe

To answer the original question: I've heard of real-life laws being used as a grounds for deletion under the term "plagurism".(sp?)

Regardless, most real-life laws are unable to work in the UN due to the much different environment we work in. I have not yet, TBH, found a RL law that actually works in the NSUN environment.

Anyways, a Bankruptcy Protection Act might be passable (which is, to some degree, what you want to do), but I doubt the actual intent listed will work.....for a variety of reasons, the least of which being the way the UN acts.

To answer the original question: I've heard of real-life laws being used as a grounds for deletion under the term "plagurism".(sp?)
"Rights and Duties of UN States", one of the defining resolutions of the UN (and written by me before I became a mod) was originally lifted intact from Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States (http://www.un.org/law/ilc/texts/decfra.htm), by the UN International Law Commission. By the time the UN regulars and I got done filing off the serial numbers and replacing the stock, it bore little semblance to the NSUN version. I'm sure there are similar stories elsewhere. I think the Law of the Sea came in that way too.

Adapting existing law is fine. Most of us aren't lawyers or diplomats, so starting from an existing document is fine. Just take out the irrelevant stuff, and add in NS stuff that makes sense, and you'll be fine.

Every so often, somebody inevitably posts the US Bill of Rights to the proposal queue, just as written. Those nations quickly find themselves outside, looking in. Plagarism is fine (though not from fellow members), outright theft is punishable by ejection.

Are you allowed to represent a real life law?
Of course you are. RL laws imho are (or should be) in the "public domain". But please adapt them before you try to bring them before NSUN.

Bankcrupcy bill (mild free trade) stating that:
Why not, regulate local things through UN decisions ... but I doubt you 'd get much support for it.
With NationStates Nations counting "billions" of inhabitants already, we don't think UN can influence their employment. Nations as big as that are ... hard to manage internally, so extra regulation will make that still harder.

1) Any industry in debt that has declared itself will get immediate funding to the sum of whatever is needed to pay wages for its staff for the immediate future.
2) The staff's pensions will be paid up to the value of 80%

This will give Industry a boost by allowing non-profitable companies to dip in and out of bankcrupcy without affecting staff

Of course, this will boost the number of startups going bankrupt too. Where do the resources come from, to "pay wages" when the company isn't producing wealth? Because that is still the basic paradigma: that a company producing "value" can pay its debts, but a company wasting value (giving out wages to people who cannot produce, or diverting created value to shareholders who didn't produce it) should stop. It's hurting other businesses around.

This comes from a govt frequently reading that "the main industry in RensSignol is 14 y-olds selling lemonade on the sidewalk, but the govt is trying to stamp that out" : I guess there's not much money floating around, so what would you consider "wages" ?