NationStates Jolt Archive

Title: The International Industries Resolution
Catagory: Advancement of Industry
Effect: Protective Tariffs

Description:
The International Industries Resolution is a resolution which will encourage the creation and funding of industry.
The resolution will:

A) Place resource or item tariffs on resources/items which a nation can produce the needed quantity of if either it already has the industry and the industry's resource extraction needs are met or if the nation has the possibility to create the industry and meet the industry's resource extraction needs.

B) Allow the tariff to be lifted if (either temporarily or permanently):

-the nation doesn't have enough funds to create the industry but can get funds in the future (temporarily)
-the nation doesn't have enough funds to create the industry and cannot get the funds in the future (permanently)
-the industry's resource extraction quota cannot be met by the nation extracting resources because of lack of extractable resources within the nation's boundries (permanently)
-the industry's resource extraction quota cannot be met by the nation extracting resources because of lack of resource extraction centers but not of extractable resources (temporarily)
-the nation has no manpower currently to support the industry (temporarily)
-the nation has no manpower and will have none in the forseeable future because of other demands (permanently)
-the nation entered a war on the defensive side, thus the manpower and resources needed to support the industry cannot be obtained because of the war (temporarily)

C) NOT allow the tariff to be lifted because:

-the nation is unwilling to commit funds to create the industry
-the nation is unwilling to commit funds to either found the industry's resource extraction centers or commit funds to found enough resource extraction centers
-the nation has the manpower to work the industry but refuses to commit it on the industry
-the nation entered a war on the offensive side, and thus the manpower and resources needed to support the industry cannot be obtained because of the war

[Added during editing]

Also, can you guys tell me how to add endorsements because I want my proposition to go to the WA list of Resolutions but I don't have any endorsements.

Please take the time to listen to constructive criticism before submitting this. A week would be reasonable. A month wouldn't be too long. If you submit it within a day or two, I predict utter failure.

As to getting endorsements, it's the easiest thing in the world. Just move into a large region (you're already in Hampshire, with 50+ WA nations), endorse the delegate and a few others, and maybe follow those up with a telegram or two asking for a return endorsement. You'll have 2 endos in hours.

Thank you for the advice. I'll wait a week for critisism and "how you should change this resolution" posts. Then I'll make my final changes, have it endorsed, then put it on the resolution list.

Why do you think it would be optimal for all nations to slap tariffs on whatever it is this proposal thinks it's requiring tariffs on? Why should we be required by the WA to make it more expensive for consumers to buy products?

I do not see the reasons, motives or arguments why are you proposing this.
Beyond that, the WA resolutions shouldn't regulate the internal economy success (or unbalance) of a nation.
It must have limits, not to attempt against the sovereignty of a state, nor its self-government.

[The WA] must have limits, not to attempt against the sovereignty of a state, nor its self-government.

No, we do that all the time.

The problem with this resolution can be summed up as "tl;dr". You've tried quite hard to lay it out clearly, but it's still as confusing as hell. I can't immediately tell (and don't want to spend the time to figure out) what all these tariffs are supposed to achieve. If I could tell I might well be in favour of it -- I'm at least somewhat pro-protection -- but the resolution plunges into the minutiae without giving me an abstract.

On a pickier note, "The resolution will" sounds like an advert for the resolution, not the resolution itself. Besides, the resolution won't. It's the World Assembly, or more likely its member nations, who will be imposing these tariffs.

OOC: I am operating under the assumption that the "Protective Tariffs" subcategory creates new tariffs. If that is not the case, please correct me. It has been a long time since I've done this. /OOC

Title: The International Industries Resolution
Catagory: Advancement of Industry
Effect: Protective Tariffs

Description:
The International Industries Resolution is a resolution which will encourage the creation and funding of industry.
The resolution will:

A) Place resource or item tariffs on resources/items which a nation can produce the needed quantity of if either it already has the industry and the industry's resource extraction needs are met or if the nation has the possibility to create the industry and meet the industry's resource extraction needs.

This sentence is very difficult to read. My understanding is that this proposal would enforce new tariffs on a given product if a nation has the capacity to create that product (or mine it, manufacture it, etc.). If I am missing something, please let me know.

Rest of the Proposal snipped

Sections B and C deal with enforcement. Good enough. My main issue is that nations can already decide how to regulate their industries. There is no resolution that appears to diminish a nation's ability to trade (or restrict their trade). Is your intention to pass a resolution to *prevent* a future resolution on this issue that you would find unfavorable, or are you trying to regulate international trade directly? My impression is that you're trying to do the latter, in which case I find several overlapping (and potentially contradictory) issues in sections B and C.

If the idea that a nation lacks resources (human or capital) can block the regulation, but if the nation is "unwilling" to allocate these resources leaves the regulation intact presents the largest problem. How does one determine whether an inability to fund or staff a project stems from true inability or from unwillingness? If Krioval were to start a large environmental initiative (unlikely, but one never knows), would Krioval be considered "unwilling" to actively participate in the lumber industry, or could we claim that we are willing, but that we lack the proper resources to allocate?

What if Krioval were to discover a large deposit of gold, and shift resources to exploit this resource, only to diminish its activities in the lumber industry? Would we be subject to tariffs on lumber because we wanted to move our workforce to a more lucrative industry? Should a nation be punished for utilizing its natural (and human) resources in its most efficient way? This proposal seems that it might do exactly that.

I wish you well on your endeavor, but I do feel that the above concerns would preclude Krioval's support of this proposal for the time being.

Wow, that's the responses I expected when I wrote this lol. Oh well, maybe I should focus on something less extremist next time. Anyway, this thread is dead. Don't bother posting.