NationStates Jolt Archive

If any of you can remember, I previously put a post like this up. Well, this hasn't been proposed because I'm waiting for feedback. Here's just a skeleton draft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Transport

I: To create an international non-profit transport beween capital cities.(Includes cties which have a different seat of Government)

II: To provide a regular service between countries

III:To invest any profits into the company so as to maintain itself

IV: To provide basic Land, Sea (If possible),and Air (At nearest Airport) transport

V: To charge only a reasonable amount, equalling the same in all countries

VI:To maintain an acceptable standard of repair and safety at all times
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please propose and criticize as you wish. And anyone who might have information about asking countries to donate money to the company please tell me if it's illegal or not.

Thanks for reading this,
Optischer:)

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL NATIONSTATES

Doesn't look illegal. But, alas, I prefer private ownership of companies.

Thank you for your time.

I am not proposing in anyway we compete, but rather supply all citizens with a basic means of international transport. No frills. No first or second class. What private companies do is up to them, we jsut want to help people get around.

the cost of all UN resolutions are taken from a nations own budgets so I wouldn't be too happy about the white elephant this would create if successful.

I remain to be convinced but I am open to arguments.

Ambassador Kaigan Miromuta

How would it be a white elephant?

Fact of life: If you carry people from A to B, you automatically compete with every company that carries people from A to B.

So, how could I not compete with companies, while transporting them from A to B? It sounds to me like theres two options. Charge nothing and let people travel on the back of horses and carts in droves, or let people ride on Ultra posh landtransport, while making them pay through the nose.

Fact of life: If you carry people from A to B, you automatically compete with every company that carries people from A to B.
and that is why it will be a white elephant

How would it be a white elephant?

Think 30,000 capitals. Think n(n-1)/2. That is a nice number of routes, don't you think?

Okay. But what if the optischerian government, along with friends and allies, poured enough money into this project to make sure it had a funding base? We could all pay an equal share on demand.

You couldn't afford to. We'd like to see you try, though, because the utter financial ruination of your country would be quite funny to watch.

Okay. But what if the optischerian government, along with friends and allies, poured enough money into this project to make sure it had a funding base? We could all pay an equal share on demand.

Then the optischerian government, along with its friends and allies, would be surreptitiously trying to turn the UN into an international communist state, and we would consider this behaviour damn close to an act of war.

How would we be communist? I'm not a communist, (though they're work is worthwhile. Boy I'm gonna get killed saying that) We just want to help everybody. Is it wrong to help? What if you needed the to go to hospital in an emergency, and our transport was the only way?

Outrageously oversimplifying descriptions:

Capitalism means private ownership of production factors.
Communism means public ownership of production factors.

Our nation, which values the private sector, cannot support a proposal that would potentially damage a portion of our economy. Because the prices would (most likely) be much lower, a large amount fo business would be rerouted to this project and not to our companies.

I'm curious why Optischer thinks my people will want to go to other capitals. I'm not saying they don't - but they don't want to go to all of them.

Private companies run feasability studies into if there is enough demand for a route to justify supplying it. If there is, then a route will be supplied. What is the point of setting up a route to a city halfway round the world when only a couple of people want to make that journey every year?

oh and i'm sure some future tech nation will moan about being resticted to conventional travel methods by this resolution

I: To create an international non-profit transport beween capital cities.(Includes cties which have a different seat of Government)

What does the bit about "cities that have a different seat of Government" mean? Were you referring to situations where different branches of a nation's government might be located in different cities to each other?

II: To provide a regular service between countries

Once very thousand years would be "regular"...

IV: To provide basic Land, Sea (If possible),and Air (At nearest Airport) transport

And what about Space (At nearest Spaceport) transport?

V: To charge only a reasonable amount, equalling the same in all countries

Is that "the same" in absolute terms or relative to the local average income?


Oh, and as I asked before, would these routes pass only through UN members -- even if this required taking lengthy detours to avoid the territories of non-members -- or would they pass through non-members as well? And if the latter's the case, would they also allow collect & deliver passengers at [i]those nations' capital cities as well?