MA: Mideast Budget Amendment (Passed)

[Oldiesfreak1854]

For the hundredth time (a slight exaggeration, but it's certainly been quite a few) can someone from the left please explain to me why 110% is so much worse than 125% from an economic standpoint, once you consider clause three? On top of that, I'd be interested in hearing the same argument for 115% and 117%. I have yet to hear an actual argument for having a higher percentage. As I've said before, I would certainly be willing to negotiate with a number more if someone on the left would actually engage in a real debate on the economic difference between the two, but that has yet to happen.

I'm with you.  I don't see what's wrong with 110%.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I would like to ask those who are proposing a higher debt ceiling: what is wrong with 110%, and why would a higher rate be better?  Governor Tmth and I have both asked this question before and have yet to receive an answer.  Could someone please explain this?

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I propose the following amendment to the bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Sponsor: Tmthforu94
[/quote]

[Oldiesfreak1854]

If the 2/3 is what you're worried about, I would be willing to eliminate that in exchange for say, 110%?

While I'm worried about that, it is an unnecessary evil because we have to have something to allow us to go over the limit in the case of an emergency. I am just afraid that might always be possible in a case of an emergency due to the economic ideologies of potential Assemblymen. That is why I am fighting to have the limit be as high as reasonably possible.   

I agree with Gass.  I think the emergency clause is important because you never know when you have to go over the limit.  That's why I proposed a simple majority vote to do it instead of 2/3; I was trying to create a reasonable compromise.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

If the 2/3 is what you're worried about, I would be willing to eliminate that in exchange for say, 110%?

While I'm worried about that, it is an unnecessary evil because we have to have something to allow us to go over the limit in the case of an emergency. I am just afraid that might always be possible in a case of an emergency due to the economic ideologies of potential Assemblymen. That is why I am fighting to have the limit be as high as reasonably possible.   

I agree with Gass.  I think the emergency clause is important because you never know when you have to go over the limit.  That's why I proposed a simple majority vote to do it instead of 2/3; I was trying to create a reasonable compromise.

IF a simple majority can go over the limit, how is there a limit?

We could only do it in emergencies that would be specifically designated in the bill.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

If the 2/3 is what you're worried about, I would be willing to eliminate that in exchange for say, 110%?

While I'm worried about that, it is an unnecessary evil because we have to have something to allow us to go over the limit in the case of an emergency. I am just afraid that might always be possible in a case of an emergency due to the economic ideologies of potential Assemblymen. That is why I am fighting to have the limit be as high as reasonably possible.   

I agree with Gass.  I think the emergency clause is important because you never know when you have to go over the limit.  That's why I proposed a simple majority vote to do it instead of 2/3; I was trying to create a reasonable compromise.

IF a simple majority can go over the limit, how is there a limit?

We could only do it in emergencies that would be specifically designated in the bill.

What is an "emergency"?

We would determine that in an amendment.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Do my fellow Assemblymen think it is a better idea to set a specific monetary amount, as the bill currently has, or a percentage of GDP, as has been suggested?

A percentage of GDP is probably fairer.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Tmthforu94
[/quote]

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I think the original pre-GDP plan was fine, for what it's worth.

I'm signing on with you and Talleyrand on this one as well.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Aye

BTW: What happened to the other provision that we were debating so much?