Most of our work force is currently employed by the government on its various projects. Much more than in the Cooperative/Private sectors.
Yes, but many of the problems and abuses we're talking about don't have to do with the citizenry's employer-employee relationship with the government.
The solution is
very much democracy and empowerment of the masses. It's just that the actual problem isn't in the workplace, so the thing that needs to be democratized to fix it isn't the workplace.
In GDI, if the government assigns you crappy housing, and refuses to build better even though it's making you miserable... Well, then you don't complain to your union rep even if you work for the government. You complain to your representative in the legislature.
I really don't like seeing one of my post being cut apart for no reason, so let's answer the gist of it in block.
One of the things I like with the Plan is that it shows the important trends of the parties with their demands and allows us to better understand their goals and reasoning. Perhaps with someone more politically-savvy than Granger, we could have other indicators, but right now we have to make do. But since Ithillid doesn't like the subject of the Plan, let's drop it.
The point is, BZ arcos were never mentioned as an emergency. There were some grumblings, there were some mentions, but we never saw riots break out for better housing or other unpleasantness. It isn't something that threatens masses of the population or the survival of the GDI. It is a luxury. The backlash from not doing masses of them will in consequence be much lesser than the housing crisis, the food crisis, the cap goods crisis or the military crisis. It isn't an emergency. It isn't a crisis. It's a problem. The point I have been trying to make is that it doesn't justify putting one of our other development lines or projects on hold while we address it. A "political vice" or "losing the support of the public" is a baseless worry.
Is it a problem we should take care of? Yes.
Does it justify a moderate response? Yes.
Does it justify the vigorous effort you advocate? Doubt.
Progress is progress, even if it doesn't complete and even a limited amount of progress is more than enough to address this issue. If I'm wrong and the pace is insufficient? then the politicos have the tools to tell us to hurry up. There is no need to go full speed right from the start here.
Another thing that I don't like is seeing my arguments be ignored. English isn't my first language. Writing all this takes time and effort.
I also don't like being misrepresented.
Just in case the bolded part wasn't clear enough:
1-2 per turn earmarked for BZ arcos until the end of the current Plan.
2 dice TOTAL earmarked for Housing problems until the end of current Plan, so BZ arcos and YZ arcos. That includes the above.
Add dice when available or necessary with the goal of completing 1 tier of BZ arcos and 1 tier of YZ arcos before the end of the current Plan.
Even if the dice gods decide to fuck us over and completion isn't achieved, it will begin addressing the problem in a meaningful way.
So let's look at those 25 dice. The next stage of Tidal will use... let's be optimistic and say 2 dice. Rail Link reconstruction, the other demand in the letter, will likely take 4 dice.
So 19 dice, but then there is Mecca, our time limited project. Since the military will likely ask for YZ Harvesting to push against NOD and Tib Inhibitors have been waiting for a long time, that will take our Tib dice. Since we likely want to keep 3 dice minimum on Mecca until it completes entirely, that means we are going to need Infra dice to make the difference. Let's be optimistic and say it will only take 5 Infra dice until the end of the current Plan.
We end up at 14 dice, which is still somet... Ah, no, we have an emergency. With the YZ Harvesting we are beginning to receive a bunch of refugees. We will want something built fast that can house a lot of people, so it's likely a tier of YZ arcos will go up to give them a roof above their heads and to continue our trend of helping the YZs. Hmmm... let's say the dice are on fire and we do it in 2 dice.
So 12 dice if the dice gods favor us. If you manage to get your 1500 progress for BZ arcos with that without tapping into Free dice, you deserve godhood. If we manage 2 tiers, we should go to Vegas. At most we can hope for 1 tier of BZ arcos without tapping into Free dice.
Hmmm... 1 tier of BZ arcos and 1 tier of YZ arcos... That combination reminds me of something...
And my point is just as simple:
We can't entirely solve this problem in an expedient manner with our current commitments without cutting into things that shouldn't be cut into. The best we can do is begin to address it. Going full speed ahead here is just throwing away dice and resources hoping the problem goes away with enough money and takes away flexibility in assigning the infra dice to address our other needs in Infra.
And, again, stop misrepresenting my argument. I have never advocated ignoring it. My initial post, that you seem to have forgotten or have decided to ignore, was:
Or, in other words: this is problem, we should address it, but we don't have a lot of resources available for it and should be careful and reasonable about the choices and resources we use in solving it.
@Cathon Grimeye , you have raised too many separate points for me to easily address them all in a single post, at least without breaking the spaghetti posting rules.
Your post was not, and I quote, "cut apart for no reason." Last time, I addressed as many of the points you raised as I felt I could get away with. Based on experience, this is about three. I subdivided and quoted three excerpts of your post because each of those excerpts was relevant to the
specific point I was attempting to make. Had I not quoted the excerpts, my reply would have been even more of a disjointed meandering slab. It would have been no more clear, and frankly
less clear, why I was saying the things I was saying.
But if you are truly upset with my having done so, I will try to abstain from doing so again, even if it makes my actual responses less coherent, or requires...
unorthodox... arrangement.
...
Now, to recap, I replied to three points raised in your last post with three points of my own. These points were:
1) The general objection you opened with last time, "it's not Plan time," is largely irrelevant, because we don't normally demand that a problem wait until Plan time to be addressed.
2) Your objection that "the politicos dropped the ball" by failing to foresee this popular demand in 2054 and pressuring us to build it into the Second Four Year Plan, and (presumably) that we shouldn't have to 'clean up their mess,' is also largely irrelevant. This is a matter that
the voters clearly care about. The legislature works for and serves the voters, and
we, to put none too fine a point work for the legislature. GDI is a republic.
3) To summarize, a math-based argument noting that we could, without unreasonable expenditure of Infrastructure dice (which are largely not needed on other projects) actually make a very large dent in the overall demand for arcology/duplex housing within the remaining five turns of the Plan. Personally I strongly recommend doing so, and will be voting accordingly.
...
Now, I would be
happy to respond to all the points you have raised in your most recent prolonged post. However, structuring that response in a manner that makes it clear what I'm talking about is going to be a bit of a challenge and require some thought on my part.
Let me see if I can at least
list the points you have raised. Note that I am attempting to summarize your own arguments here.
...
A) Blue Zone arcology construction was never mentioned as an emergency before; it is a luxury good that people don't need for survival. The situation is therefore not a crisis. Therefore, it is unlikely that "a vigorous effort" to resolve the situation is necessary. We should not cancel the things we were already going to do, in order to do more of this instead.
B)
@Simon_Jester , you doofus, you have underestimated how many housing dice I, Cathon Grimeye, wish to spend. I meant to say "1-2 dice on
Blue Zone arcologies, accompanied by an average of about 0.6 dice/turn on
Yellow Zone arcologies, enough to finish one round of Yellow Zone arcologies by the end of the second Four Year Plan, earmarking a
total of ten dice between now and 2057Q4, and optionally maybe more if we can spare them from whatever else we wanted to do." You, Simon, are misrepresenting me.
C) Infrastructure dice are badly needed to work on Mecca Planned City and Rail Links, and therefore we cannot spare very many to work on arcologies, even after subtracting a couple to polish off Tidal Power in the short-term future
D) Mindful of (C), we can't entirely solve this problem in an expedient manner, and we should be careful not to overspend on it.
...
Now, before I go on,
does this represent an accurate summary of your points?