NationStates Jolt Archive

I submitted this on Reclamation, but, being the lazyass that I am, can't wait for a response...

A draft by myself and socioeconomic military (a friend of mine). Category: Free Trade, Strength: Strong:

NOTING that trade between nations stimulates international peace and stability through the exchange of goods and services between cultures, nations and peoples,

FURTHER NOTING that international trade is economically beneficial toward all parties involved,

CONCLUDING that the promotion of free trade is advantageous to all nations, including those not directly involved in the trading,

1. DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution:
a. “goods” as any nonhuman item;
b. “services” as any action performed for a payment;
a. “free trade” as the unimpeded transfer of goods and/or services between UN member nations;
b. “trade restricting devices” as any device used to restrict free trade, be it monetary or otherwise,

2. ABOLISHES trade restricting devices between UN member nations,

3. DECLARES that Section 2 is void if all trade, including that between a country and its territories or other possessions, is restricted by the same trade restricting device, at the same rate,

4. STATES that trade restricting devices may still be used between UN and non-UN nations,

5. EMPHASIZES that this promotion of free trade will allow for intercontinental constancy and the elimination of minority despotism.

Your definition of trade-restricting devices is lacking. Is this declaring dutied goods and tarriffs illegal?

Mmm, doesn't have enough specifics.
And if tarrifs are illegal, I don't think I'll support the proposal.

1b is far too broad, even national regulation could be included under it, which makes it far too over-reaching. Equally, I don't support the removal of trade barriers in all areas and I wish to try and submit a Tobin Tax proposal some time this year, which would be severely impeded by this proposal.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

You do realize this would:
- ban embargoes, sanctions, and probably war (because by blowing up the enemy's factories, you're restricting their trade)
- prohibit any safety, labour or environmental regulations (restriction of trade)
- essentially permit the slave trade in non-humans (actually it wouldn't - it just contradicts Ban Trafficking in Persons)
- generally not work?

You do realize this would:
- ban embargoes, sanctions, and probably war (because by blowing up the enemy's factories, you're restricting their trade)
- prohibit any safety, labour or environmental regulations (restriction of trade)
- essentially permit the slave trade in non-humans (actually it wouldn't - it just contradicts Ban Trafficking in Persons)
- generally not work?

*sigh*

That's why it's a draft Compadria/Gruen -_-


Also, it doesn't make tarrifs illegal. Read section 3:

3. DECLARES that Section 2 is void if all trade, including that between a country and its territories or other possessions, is restricted by the same trade restricting device, at the same rate,So long as the country is imposing the tarrifs on all nations- not just some it doesn't like- those tarrifs are legal. In doing this, this proposal protects smaller nations from a bigger nation bullying them with sanctions, while still allowing tarrifs for the world.

And also, tarrifs against a non-UN nation are still legal.

Interesting, although I agree that it still needs considerable work.
Earlier today I was thinking about an 'International Commercial Court' proposal, for appeals when national courts & governments don't seem to be handling any disputes over international trade fairly: Maybe we can work together (with the initial discussion in FAIRTRADE's forum, perhaps?) to combine these ideas?

In short: no. This is one of those rare things, a proposal guaranteed to drive Ecopoeia out of the UN.

St Edmund, your suggestion is interesting (and might, with any luck, undermine the UNFTC) - could it not be discussed more openly, though? Ecopoeia is not a FAIRTRADE member.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

FAIRTRADE is an open forum.

FAIRTRADE is an open forum.
"You do not have permission to view this topic"

Really?

Ecopeia: you just have to register. Anyway, thanks to Reclamation, i've come up with a second draft, hopefully this time clearer and more to the point. Gruen, please respond, because I think I've (hopefully) gotten through your loopholes.

NOTING that trade between nations stimulates international peace and stability through the exchange of goods and services between cultures, nations and peoples,

FURTHER NOTING that international trade is economically beneficial toward all parties involved,

CONCLUDING that the promotion of free trade is advantageous to all nations, including those not directly involved in the trading,

EMPHASIZING that this resolution will allow for smaller nations to be protected from larger ones, while still allowing tariffs.

1. DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution:
a. “goods” as any nonhuman item;
b. “free trade” as the unimpeded transfer of goods between UN member nations;
c. “trade restricting devices” as any monetary device used to restrict free trade;
d. "preferential tariffs" as a trade restricting device placed on a nation at a higher monetary rate than that which is placed on other nations,

2. ABOLISHES preferential tariffs between UN member nations,

3. DECLARES that nations will be exempt, on a per case basis, from Section 2 if they meet the following conditions:
a. Said nation has declared war on a nation to whom they will place the preferential tariff, and is currently at war with said nation;
b. Said nation is required by international law to impose a tariff,

4. STATES that preferential tariffs may still be used by a UN nation, provided they are imposing said tariff on a non-UN nation.

Still a resignation issue. We vigorously defend our right to operate preferential tariffs.

St Edmund, your suggestion is interesting (and might, with any luck, undermine the UNFTC)

H'mm, thanks for the reminder: I'll have to include a sentence about this court's jurisdiction not extending into any fields for which previous resolutions have already given other bodies jurisidiction...

- could it not be discussed more openly, though? Ecopoeia is not a FAIRTRADE member.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

I wouldn't have objected to posting the [suggested] united proposal here for discussion before submitting it, all that I was thinking of doing in FAIRTRADE was getting the messy work of initially trying to fuse the two topics into a merged draft done with fewer interruptions...

However I've been putting my ideas about the court down on paper, and it looks as though that idea would probably need a complete proposal of its own (because of the length-limit) anyway...

sign me up

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/zombies.jpg