NationStates Jolt Archive

Title: “Please can we go, Sir?”

Description: Fed up with their lack of freedom, more and more of @@NAME@@’s population is leaving the country for more libertarian nations. The government is concerned about the effect this will have on the country and its image.

Validity: Only for countries with below average political freedoms and civil rights.

[option] “We must put a stop to this mass emigration!” cries your Foreign Minister, @@RANDOMNAME@@. “They will tell the tru…uh…spread vicious lies about the glorious nation of @@NAME@@! These traitors must be banned from emigrating, and arrested for good measure, to protect our standing in the international community!”
[effect] airports and ports are patrolled night and day by police to ensure no one leaves the country
[stats] political freedoms down, civil rights down, police funding up, taxes up, happiness down.

[option] “Who cares about the pansy-ass ‘international community’?” counters @@RANDOMNAME@@, the head of the armed forces. “If they don’t like us, we’ll blast them back to the Stone Age! Of course, the military will need a substantial increase in funding for this, but it’s certainly worth it.”
[effect] @@NAME@@ fights wars every other week with countries with nothing better to do than worry about human rights
[stats] happiness up, military funding up, taxes up, political freedoms up, civil rights up, economy down slightly, arms manufacturing industry up.

[option] “It’s not that we dislike @@NAME@@,” pipes up potential émigré, @@RANDOMNAME@@. “But the government, who we weren’t even given the chance to vote for, dictates what we do in every single second of our private lives. If we were given more freedom, and maybe allowed to have elections occasionally, we wouldn’t want to go.”
[effect] elections are introduced but are frequently a farce as many voters don’t even know what a ballot paper is
[stats] political freedoms up considerably, civil rights up considerably, happiness up considerably

[option] Your chief advisor, the well-known and hated @@RANDOMNAME@@, has an alternative view. “Do nothing,” he says. “It’s not as if we actively participate with other countries, except for trade. And those countries need our trade, they’re not going to stop because of alleged abuses of our people.”
[effect] émigrés from @@NAME@@ spread the truth about the country but find that no one actually cares
[stats] political freedoms up, civil rights up, happiness up, economy down slightly

[option]"Just banning emigration won't stop it" says construction worker @@RANDOMNAME@@. "We need to surround the nation with an impassable physical barrier, then we won't need to worry about emigration, because it will be impossible"
[effect] @@NAME@@ is surrounded by a 20-metre high titanium wall with built-in AA guns.
[stats] civil rights down, happiness down, compassion down, defence up, crime down

[option] A group of industrialists, outraged by these ‘traitors’, has arranged a private meeting with you. Their leader, @@RANDOMNAME@@, while prostrating himself at your feet, says “Think of the effect this emigration is having on the economy. The workforce will decrease, and so our output will fall. Why, some of us may have to consider reducing our household staff!”
[effect] emigration is limited in line with population growth in order to ensure economic success
[stats] political freedoms down, economy up, taxes up, corruption up, civil rights down, happiness down.

Any comments welcome.

I'd focus more on the reasons for emigration in the real world - prospects of wealth, health, and education in other countries as well as political oppression.

Another option idea:

"Just banning emigration will not stop it" says construstion worker @@RANDOMNAME@@"We need to surround the nation with an impassible physical barrier, then we won't need to worry about emigration, because it will be impossible"
[effect] @@NAME@@ is surrounded by a 20-metre high titanium wall with built-in AA guns.
[stats] civil rights down, happiness down, compassion down, defence up, crime down

I'd focus more on the reasons for emigration in the real world - prospects of wealth, health, and education in other countries as well as political oppression.
I considered that, but if I want to include all of them there'd have to be about 8 options. I think political oppression is a good enough reason for it - look at Jews leaving Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

Another option idea:

"Just banning emigration will not stop it" says construstion worker @@RANDOMNAME@@"We need to surround the nation with an impassible physical barrier, then we won't need to worry about emigration, because it will be impossible"
[effect] @@NAME@@ is surrounded by a 20-metre high titanium wall with built-in AA guns.
[stats] civil rights down, happiness down, compassion down, defence up, crime down
I like it, but I don't want to put in more than 5 options. And I quite like the options I've got, it'll take something spectacular to make me want to remove one. ;)

I like it, but I don't want to put in more than 5 options. And I quite like the options I've got, it'll take something spectacular to make me want to remove one. ;)
Still, the maximum amt. of options is 6.

Still, the maximum amt. of options is 6.
Ok, I've put yours in. I'll submit it on Monday. Gives enough time for other people to have their say.

There is no maximum number of options.

There is no maximum number of options.

But isn't it more likely that you will reject an issue if it is longer than six options?

But isn't it more likely that you will reject an issue if it is longer than six options?
No, I don think its that way, but I am not too sure. Still, I am saying the the amount of option should stay sensible, like any number between 2 and 6.

No, I don think its that way, but I am not too sure. Still, I am saying the the amount of option should stay sensible, like any number between 2 and 6.
At the moment I don' think there are any issues that have more than 6. I can only think of one off the top of my head that has six (the military budget one, don't know what number it is, or the proper title...not even sure it does have six, now I come to think about it).
I imagine a lot of people who play the game casually wouldn't want to read through 8 or 10 options, so 6 is maybe pushing it from that point of view. In my opinion, the ideal issue has 4 options - a extremely for (whatever), one extremely against, and two ridiculous ones that you can't figure out the effects for...

Well, diferrent people have different opinions. I personally say 6 options because that improves realism.

Well, diferrent people have different opinions. I personally say 6 options because that improves realism.
You play the game for realism?!
*points and laughs* :p
Heh, kidding. Fair enough. I prefer the sillier issues.

You play the game for realism?!
*points and laughs* :p
Heh, kidding. Fair enough. I prefer the sillier issues.
No, I don't play it for realism, but I still think that excessive unrealism can be bad, but sometimes a silly issue is a good issue.

[option] “It’s not that we dislike @@NAME@@,” pipes up potential émigré, @@RANDOMNAME@@. “But the government, who we weren’t even given the chance to vote for, dictates what we do in every single second of our private lives. If we were given more freedom, and maybe allowed to have elections occasionally, we wouldn’t want to go.”
[effect] elections are introduced but are frequently a farce as many voters don’t even know what a ballot paper is
[stats] political freedoms up considerably, civil rights up considerably, happiness up considerably


The thing is .. my country has below average civil rights AND below average political freedoms... yet voting is COMPULSORY...

You might want to add 'Voting is banned to the validity section

The thing is .. my country has below average civil rights AND below average political freedoms... yet voting is COMPULSORY...

You might want to add 'Voting is banned to the validity section
You can have compulsory voting but no elections...

EDIT: Ok, it's been submitted as it is in the OP.

But isn't it more likely that you will reject an issue if it is longer than six options?

No.

No.

If there any limit?

If there any limit?
There is no limit.

It sounds like a good issue, but would you have to have low polit. freedoms and civil rights or just one of them be low?

It sounds like a good issue, but would you have to have low polit. freedoms and civil rights or just one of them be low?
Both of them. Assuming that part survives as is in the editing process.