NationStates Jolt Archive


New Issue - National Debt.

The Holy Palatinate
22-09-2004, 00:53
If people could have a look at this, and make suggestions before I submit this I'd be grateful!
========================================
Name: National Debt Skyrockets!

Description: As @@NATION@@’s debt increases, people ask – how long can this continue?

Validity: Not valid for nations with taxation below 5% or above 95%.

[option] Lobbyist @@RANDOMNAME@@ insists that "@@NATION@@ needs to keep borrowing – there are simply too many things that need to be paid for, and the public won’t accept an increase in taxation. Besides, Government spending is good for the economy, and so is low taxation – so a bit more borrowing now means that you’ll have a much larger economy, which means a broader tax base in future: so you’ll have the extra revenue you need to pay off the debt."
[effect] @@NATION@@ borrows heavily to cuts taxes and increases spending.
[stats] economy improves significantly, Tax drops by 5% immediately then increases by 1% per day. The increase in taxation continues for a minimum of 10 days; then stops when any Issue option is chosen which reduces taxation.

[option] "Peh" says @@RANDOMNAME@@, a senior bureaucrat. Why bother paying off debts? We’re the government. Just pass a law cancelling all government debts and be rid of the problem.
[effect] @@NATION@@ cancels it’s debts, lowering taxes – at the expense of the Finance Sector.
[stats] Lower taxes, economy suffers greatly (especially Insurance Sales? – as no banking industry exists).

[option] "Never a borrower nor a lender be" quotes your Finance Minister, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Governments borrowing – or investing - interferes with natural market forces and harms the economy."
[effect] @@NATION@@ bans government borrowing or investment, reducing fiscal flexibility.
[stats] Increase in economic freedom, temporary increase in tax to pay off existing debt.

[option] "I’m sick of taxation" says voter @@RANDOMNAME@@. Why not cut back services a bit and invest the money you save? It may take a while, but eventually @@NATION@@ should have enough money invested to pay for the government – and we won’t need taxes any more!
[effect] @@NATION@@ tightens it's belt for a better future.
[stats] economy suffers significantly, Tax increase by 5% immediately then decreases by 1% per day. This effect stops permanently if taxes ever reach 0%.
Redmontrial
22-09-2004, 04:19
I don't think that can be coded. I thnk all effects need to be one-shot, instant.

I could be wrong, though.
San Mabus
22-09-2004, 05:11
The effects of the issue seem to ignore the fact that tax cuts STIMULATE the economy, as more money in the hands of the populace increases spending, and grows the economy, hopefully to the point where increased tax revenue balances the budget (case in point - USA in the 80's with Capital Gains Tax Cuts). But no one with any liberal point of view ever seems to understand this....
Liverpool England
22-09-2004, 07:51
Plus, what if a nation had Frightening economy on 50% tax and received this issue? Makes no sense.
The Holy Palatinate
22-09-2004, 10:58
I don't think that can be coded. I thnk all effects need to be one-shot, instant.

I could be wrong, though.
You could be right; however the crime question has a delayed effect, with crime disappearing a while after you've introduced progressive policies etc, etc.
Hopefully a Mod will let me know...
The Holy Palatinate
22-09-2004, 11:01
The effects of the issue seem to ignore the fact that tax cuts STIMULATE the economy, as more money in the hands of the populace increases spending, and grows the economy, hopefully to the point where increased tax revenue balances the budget (case in point - USA in the 80's with Capital Gains Tax Cuts). But no one with any liberal point of view ever seems to understand this....
That is the POV of the first option, and the reason for the increased Economy.
Do you consider this insufficient?
The Holy Palatinate
22-09-2004, 11:03
Plus, what if a nation had Frightening economy on 50% tax and received this issue? Makes no sense.
Thanks for your reply, but *why* does it make no sense? Surely people will be demanding that taxes be lowered & the government spend more, no matter what the state of affairs?
Redmontrial
22-09-2004, 11:36
Tax cuts don't stimulate the economy, Mobius. All they do is put more money in the hands of the greedy rich.

You want tax cuts? make tax cuts cut out less taxes the poorer you go, and more taxes the HIGHER you go.


And make it known that for anybody with a net worth exceeding 1 million @@CURRENCY@@ will be charged with High Treason and shot if they attempt to leave the nation or if they have a suspicious major downfall in income. That should pretty much keep the government funded, and the People happy.

Soak da rich, I say. They can afford it. 99% of wealth is controlled by the smallest 5% of the populace. They can afford it all right.
Unfree People
22-09-2004, 15:56
I don't think that can be coded. I thnk all effects need to be one-shot, instant.

I could be wrong, though.
You could be right; however the crime question has a delayed effect, with crime disappearing a while after you've introduced progressive policies etc, etc.
Hopefully a Mod will let me know...
He's correct; effects are absolute. ie, if it raises your tax rate, it stays raised (until you choose another issue choice that lowers it).
Paxania
22-09-2004, 21:06
I don't think it makes sense, as every time something needs funding, taxes go up. How is there a national debt?

Paying off the debt should be disastrous for the economy.
Eta Carinae
23-09-2004, 15:35
Paying off the debt would be disastrous in that economic growth is slowed or halted as people are no longer living beyond their means. However, if you allow the debt to balloon, there will be a point where the economy collapses or goes into recession. The only way to ward off debt-induced collapse or recession without being frugal is to have sufficient economic growth.

Economic growth is only possible by increasing consumption. Because the Earth has finite resources, economic growth is unsustainable. It cannot continue forever. Economic growth is also destructive to the biosphere.

May I suggest that the issue be valid for nations with high economic growth?
Paxania
23-09-2004, 19:14
It should be valid for nations with small, stagnant economies, big governments, and low taxes.