P4 policial thread - Page 10

rendelnep · August 29, 2002, 19:32

right I am afraid I am now leaving the P4 because I now relise I have a closer tie to the CCCP.

edit: made minor modifactions to spelling

Method · August 29, 2002, 19:59

meh. oh well. sorry to see you go, but next time don't get our hopes up

BTW, there are only 3 C's in CCCP

. also you can't say CCCCP party, because the "P" stands for party.

One more question: if you "have a closer tie to the CCCP" then why would you join its EXACT OPPOSITE?

rendelnep · August 29, 2002, 20:10

no it's exact oppisite would be the gunhoers of the ACE you are just the the more moderate form of the same idealogies with less influences of socialism not that you would care to admit it.

Archaic · August 30, 2002, 01:24

Quote:

Originally posted by rendelnep
no it's exact oppisite would be the gunhoers of the ACE you are just the the more moderate form of the same idealogies with less influences of socialism not that you would care to admit it.

That's rather a warped view of things. Just because we're primarily pacifistic doesn't give us more in common with them than it does ACE. Especially considering their complete lack of understanding of turn advantage.

Maniac · August 30, 2002, 08:43

Quote:

Our party stands for economic and technological progress. Thus our keywords are Discover and Build. The way to reach these goals are equal chances and free education among other things.

From the party manifesto. Equal opportunities and (almost) free education are economically left (= social-democratic) themes. So I agree with Rendelnep we have things in common with CDC. The biggest difference is we don't take things to the extreme. We aren't idealists with a simple worldview in other words. CCCP wants to divide all property equally among all people, making them somewhat happy in this life, but at the cost of a stagnating technological progress. The Capital Party, their opposite, doesn't want a social security system providing equal opportunities or education at all. They somehow believe people will always fulfill their potential and become happy if they just want to, no matter how the odds are against them at birth. P4 is the middleway. Our goal is also to make people happy, but we realize the way to do it is not as simple as the CCCP or CP present. P4 realizes the more advanced technology, the more and the better the basic needs of all human beings can be fulfilled. Thus we create a knowledge society. A free market system, but unlike the CP with government support for anyone who wants to study, also the poor people. That way everyone can fulfill their potential and reach happiness, and our society becomes eudaimonic in the end.

I hope no one will defect to the Capital Party after this speech,

but if P4 ever becomes a right-wing party, solely devoted to free market economics and nothing else, I think I will leave myself to the Scientific Axis.

Archaic · August 30, 2002, 10:19

Well, I would defect........except that I believe in the equal chances stuff, along with a limited social security system. (ie. No dole bludgers thanks!)

Method · August 30, 2002, 10:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
but if P4 ever becomes a right-wing party, solely devoted to free market economics and nothing else, I think I will leave myself to the Scientific Axis.

good point. we use free market economics as a means of furthering science, and probably if i hadn't been in this party when TSA was formed, i would've joined it too.

DeathByTheSword · August 30, 2002, 10:28

i believe in progress and prosparity in a free world!

thats all

Maniac · August 30, 2002, 10:47

TKG, thanks for your party loyalty in that case.

Archaic, the goal of the social security system would be to get people at work as soon as possible. For example, if many people are fired in a certain sector, and there is no more need for people with their degree, our aim would be to re-educate them, with government support, and reinsert them in the system as soon as possible, not to support them with tax money until they die.

Archaic · August 30, 2002, 10:52

Oh, yes, yes, I know that. The problem is that often, that's exactly what happens. You get this large number of long term unemployed who can't be bothered finding a job, or who refuse to be retrained.

Maniac · August 30, 2002, 10:56

Well, if they refuse to be retrained and educated in any of the programs offered, or refuse to accept any of the jobs offered, they don't get paid anymore. A simple rule. I agree left governments should be a lot stricter with such rules.

AdamTG02 · August 30, 2002, 11:37

I've responded to some of the points Maniac raised in the Merchant Exchange thread.

Since my reply deals more with inter-party issues than economics, and since you guys have a very interesting social policy debate going on in here, I've posted it in the EDP thread.

Archaic · September 1, 2002, 10:19

*Adds the P4 standard disclaimer to his sig*
I'm going to need it a lot it seems. Raising hackles is so much fun, don't you agree?

Method · September 1, 2002, 10:27

ok, perfect. now put it at the top, and make it bigger

Maniac · September 1, 2002, 13:22

I'm glad you added that disclaimer, even though the better solution would simply be to stop insulting ad hominem. It would improve your health as well! No more problems with colds.

The Bloody Baro · September 1, 2002, 14:39

I should have had that in place when I argued with Pandemoniak.

DeathByTheSword · September 1, 2002, 15:27

guys about PB`s shall we vote on the issue?

Method · September 1, 2002, 15:29

i vote

NAY

Maniac · September 1, 2002, 15:47

I ABSTAIN

DeathByTheSword · September 1, 2002, 15:52

I NEA

EDIT: changed it to NEA

Maniac · September 1, 2002, 15:56

Err DBTS you don't have to NAY if you don't want to. I think there are other P4 members who are in favour of PBs.

DeathByTheSword · September 1, 2002, 16:05

no we dont really need PB`s but i like the power and MAYBE this will change some time in the future

but with julliennew and tacmar death we only need the votes from TBB and archaic

Maniac · September 1, 2002, 16:13

My answer really depends on how I view this game:

If I think as "what's most cost-efficient" I would vote against PBs.

If I roleplay as a politician I would vote in favour of PBs, as I believe in the MAD-principle making sure no one uses them. Unfortunately the AI does't get that principle.

So, how do I need to vote people? As a gameplayer or a roleplayer?

Method · September 1, 2002, 16:19

you need to vote NAY. not only are they not necessary, but they are a waste of minerals, and it's damaging our reputation as a party.

The Bloody Baro · September 1, 2002, 17:56

I vote NEA. Normally IRL I would vote Yay but the AI doesn't get the MAD concept.

Method · September 1, 2002, 19:26

3 votes. ignoring julien and TacMar as we are, since they are dead, that's majority. Measure to build PBs fails.

for future reference, will internal votes be passed by majority, or the more than 66%/less than 33% way (as in constitution)?

Archaic · September 2, 2002, 03:32

Just FYI, I abstained.

And I haven't exactly been insulting ad hominem Maniac. For that, my insult would have to be the basis of my rebuttal. No, I'm just being plain insulting. It's part of my nature, and I can't exactly help it. I don't tend to say something insulting though unless either that person has insulted me (lucky22), or I blow my top at what seems a completly uninformed remark.

Quote:

Originally posted by TKG
ok, perfect. now put it at the top, and make it bigger

Is this to your liking? ^_~

Method · September 2, 2002, 09:42

yes

PB vote - Will we build a PB?
Maniac-ABSTAIN
DBTS-NAY
TKG-NAY
Juliennew-DEAD
Archaic-ABSTAIN
TacticalMarine-DEAD
The Bloody Baro-NAY

DeathByTheSword · September 2, 2002, 10:35

Then I shall scrap it from the policy and about voting just majority is good by me

Method · September 2, 2002, 10:37

oh, and FYI...

Merge with EDP?
Maniac-YEA
DBTS-YEA
TKG-YEA
Juliennew-DEAD
Archaic-YEA
TacticalMarine-DEAD
The Bloody Baro-YEA

adam?