Pacific Supreme Council Thread

[RI]

Like what?

I'm sorry, but as long as the region wastes its money willingly on things like elective friggan abortions, I refuse to vote to raise taxes one cent. We cannot complain about being short on cash to cover things when we a shoveling it away on stupid things.

That would be nice place to start. I'm sure we can find others if we look

That's nice Jbrase, and I agree, but it just isn't happening unless we can come up with at least four yes votes in the Assembly.

[RI]

I think it's fairly clear that the Council is well to the right of the region in general, although I'm not sure why that's the case.

It's true, but there's not a whole lot further to the left that the region could go without completely leaving the realm of things that are normally discussed in North American politics. I'm not opposed to taking up such proposals, but it seems that the region has gone so far to the left that most things that we could pass would either be more conservative or libertarian or communitarian than the region is now.

I'm not necessarily saying this in a negative way, for the record. From my own perspective, I like having a lot (those certainly not all, obviously) of the leftist economic policies that we have. Therefore, it would only be natural for me to address the areas where I believe the region is most out of line, in my opinion.

[RI]

Will we actually have a situation where someone could lose this time?

[RI]

Can we begin debate on my bill? (I am assuming fuzzy's is withdrawn do to federal law)

I'll support your bill, fyi.

[RI]

I'm going to introduce this bill. Feel free to offer amendments to it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[RI]

And another bill:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[RI]

Re-Naming Act: Aye

[RI]

Can we begin debate on my bill? (I am assuming fuzzy's is withdrawn do to federal law)

I'll support your bill, fyi.

Didn't you support the renaming just a few months ago?

Maybe...

(I really don't care about renaming. It's all sort of fun and games to do so, but if you really think about it, it wouldn't be a very nice thing to do in real life to a community. Meh.)

[RI]

Do we have a cost projection for that?  

Oh, it'll certainly be expensive, but the idea is that if it works, it'll return many times on the investment in the form of economic growth.

I'm sure it would be fascinating to try to calculate. We might want to amend it to cap the value of the vouchers, though, otherwise people could use them to buy the most expensive car they can...hmm.

[RI]

Look, I know it sounds extreme, but I'm frankly a bit sick and tired of waiting around for change to come on this issue. I know you're not going to like it Jbrase; I knew that when I wrote it.

I'm open to amendments if there's something that can be improved, but the 'mandate', you might say, is there for a reason.

The way that I see it, by effectively replacing almost all of the gasoline-powered vehicles on the road, and by paying for a good portion of the transition, we would be creating a massive economic stimulus that would go to car companies, a massive stimulus that would go to each and every car owner because, after the initial payment, they would never have to buy gasoline again. If they have a hydrogen car, they would almost essentially get a home fueling station, meaning that the price of their fuel would be no more than the price of their monthly water bill. This will also create increase aggregate supply because it will remove high fuel costs for companies who need to ship things within the region. We are doing all of these things in the least costly manner to individuals that we can, and in the most economically correct way that you can (for government intervention).

[RI]

We could exempt cars from other regions for limited durations. I don't know how much that would help or not.

[RI]

We could exempt cars from other regions for limited durations. I don't know how much that would help or not.

Well the problem I have with that is why are we allowing others to do what we are essentially banning our own from?

Because we can't control what other regions do; we can only control (to an extent) what ours does. We're not the Senate.

I've been thinking about the tourism aspect, and a problem with exempting cars from other regions is that, with this transition, businesses should (if they want to make money) transition some of their infrastructure over (such as gas stations to charging stations or whatnot), so there won't be many places for out-of-region cars to fill up at. Unless 'fuel stations' as a concept goes out of business altogether... I'm really not sure what would happen in this aspect of things.

Then again, vehicles necessary for interregional commerce are exempt, so I don't know if this falls under that or not. Damn expansive commerce clauses that could mean anything.

[RI]

I made a couple changes:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The five times per month number is changeable. I pretty much just picked it at random.

[RI]

I think my bills have been on the floor for more than three days now, fyi.

[RI]

Would you all just like to push a vote on realistics' bills now or debate Jbrase's amendment?

If I have to put it to a vote now, I'll be pushing the original text.

Would the vote be on my original bill or the revised version I posted?

Either way, we should probably hold a vote on the fracking bill, since it hasn't had any debate.

[RI]

The vote is now open on realistic's revised version of the Fracking bill.

As far as I know, there should only be one version of the Fracking bill. Assuming we mean this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another Fracking Ban: Aye

[RI]

As for the USSEA, I'd like to get fuzzy and Xahar's opinions on the matter before I make any decisions.

[RI]

Any thoughts on my amendment to the USSEA?

I've always been a big believer in getting things done, as in actually solving problems. It just makes sense to me to try to, whenever feasible, completely fix a problem, especially for big ones, rather than take incremental steps without any guarantee of not just kicking the ball down the road. That's why I wrote the bill I did, because most bills about alternative energy are what I see as kicking the ball down the road and hoping that maybe someday we'll get there.

Your amendment is more of an incremental one than the complete overhaul that I would like. I'm pretty confident that I could get the bill passed as is, so I don't see a ton of incentive to tear it apart. That said, I am willing to incorporate some of the ideas in your amendment into your bill, such as the incentives to manufacturers for developing these cars (though I think they should have a good incentive already), and if there is anything specific that you think should be changed, I'm open to it, though I really believe that to work the 'mandate' must be in place. My bill is authoritarian, I suppose, but I don't think that is an inherently bad thing, especially when we're supplying most of the means to do it at as little out-of-pocket cost as possible to individuals.

That said, if Xahar and/or Fuzzy have a big issue with my bill, I suppose I might have to do something about it, but I haven't heard anything as of yet.

[RI]

Like moving fish from one tank to another, if you just simply put a fish in something new right away without time to adjust your gonna hurt them. 

I did try to space out when the various sections come into effect. People would have two years between the time when the vouchers begin to be distributed and when the ban goes into effect.

Timeline:
1. January 1, 2012: Beginning of voucher distribution
2. June 1, 2012: Beginning of gas price increases
3. January 1, 2014: Ban on gasoline vehicles in effect and end of gas price increases
4. June 1, 2014: End of voucher distribution

Is this timeline inadequate? I can move it all out an additional year if you think development is a serious concern.

[RI]

An amended version of the USSEA:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What do you think of my changes Jbrase?

[RI]

Any comments on the revised bill? If not, I'd like to end debate as soon as possible.

[RI]

I'm not in love with the bill, but I'll vote for it.

In light of such, I move that we end debate on the USSEA and put the measure to a vote.

[RI]

Aye.

[RI]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Making people figure out the taxes in their head reinforces math skills, though.

[RI]

I know I'm probably breaching protocol by posting in here, but I had no idea that places in Americ Atlasia display prices without tax included. Do people have to mentally work out the full price before paying?

One of the nation's weirder quirks, if so, and this bill has the Governor's full support.

Yeah, all prices are pre-tax.