04-12-2003, 21:11
The Issue
The Department of Defense has put its case for a substantial increase in funding for the coming financial year.
The Debate
1. "These are turbulent times we live in," says Defense Chief Alexei Jones. "Turbulent and dangerous. And the only sensible response to that, of course, is to build a lot more weapons. Unless we get the funding we need, I can't promise that we'll be able to defend Zenbenia's sovereign borders from rogue nations and foreign powers. Or those leaky boatloads of refugees, for that matter."
2. "NO MORE BOMBS," chant the protestors outside Parliament House, in a repetitious and increasingly annoying appeal. Spokesperson George W. Jones, speaking through a feedback-afflicted microphone, says, "Zenbenia needs fewer weapons, not more! Make the world a safer place! Disarm now!"
Anyone have suggestions on what the best choice is? The first option seems to increase taxes (increased funding), possibly increase the economy (more jobs building weapons), but possibly lower civil rights or political freedoms (rejecting refugees). However, although the second option seems that it would decrease taxes I'm not sure what other effects it would have.
Thanks for your advice in advance!
The Department of Defense has put its case for a substantial increase in funding for the coming financial year.
The Debate
1. "These are turbulent times we live in," says Defense Chief Alexei Jones. "Turbulent and dangerous. And the only sensible response to that, of course, is to build a lot more weapons. Unless we get the funding we need, I can't promise that we'll be able to defend Zenbenia's sovereign borders from rogue nations and foreign powers. Or those leaky boatloads of refugees, for that matter."
2. "NO MORE BOMBS," chant the protestors outside Parliament House, in a repetitious and increasingly annoying appeal. Spokesperson George W. Jones, speaking through a feedback-afflicted microphone, says, "Zenbenia needs fewer weapons, not more! Make the world a safer place! Disarm now!"
Anyone have suggestions on what the best choice is? The first option seems to increase taxes (increased funding), possibly increase the economy (more jobs building weapons), but possibly lower civil rights or political freedoms (rejecting refugees). However, although the second option seems that it would decrease taxes I'm not sure what other effects it would have.
Thanks for your advice in advance!