NationStates Jolt Archive


Issue Question

28-09-2003, 15:49
"This is supposed to be a democratic country," Gambling industry spokesperson Faith du Pont says. "Yet these archaic laws say I can't donate money to support a political party. They put ceilings on the amount any party can spend on advertising. It's time to stop treating voters like children, and trust them to make up their own minds. Free the ballot box!"
[Accept]


"You say political freedom, I hear vote-buying," says popular anarchist Jennifer Jefferson. "If these fat cats get their way, politicians will buy their own seat in Congress. And let's face it, a slick advertising campaign can convince a lot of apathetic voters. We need to tighten the laws, not repeal them. Money should have no place in politics!"
[Accept]


"Frankly, I don't see why we need to have elections at all," says your brother, Jack Hamilton, over a late-night malt whiskey. "You always seem to know what's best. Why not scrap the whole political system? It would make things so much simpler."
[Accept]

If I wanted to increase civil rights, which option would I pick. I'd say option 1 would, but I just want to double-check. Also, what consequences would the first two options have on civil rights, the economy and political freedoms (I don't really care about the 3rd option).
Demo-Bobylon
28-09-2003, 15:51
MODALERT. Should probably be in tech. #1 increases political freedoms but increases corruption, #2 decreases political freedoms and decreases corruption.
Happy?
Mintar
28-09-2003, 15:52
I don't think option one increases political freedoms. I think it decreases it as it makes corporations have A LOT of political power.\

2nd one may decrease economy, although I'm not sure. It doesn't seem to have much affect on my nation.

3rd one kills your political freedoms.
Demo-Bobylon
28-09-2003, 15:53
Trust me: it doesn't make much sense, but it increases them.
Omz222
28-09-2003, 15:54
I always choose number 1, and it has somehow a good effect on political rating.