Remove ads

Paths of Civilization II: Paths of Industrialization

Reader mode
Rakuhn said:
If given any significant power (which, unless we want to play a declining power, we are almost certainly going to do), whether equal or unequal, our Upper and Lower Houses are going to disagree to the point of gridlock. When it happens, we'll need to do another constitutional convention to resolve the issue. Hoping that we can avoid it by waiting 25-50 years seems much more expensive than dealing with it when the time comes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's what the King/Queen is for.
One-off situations, he/she intervenes.
When it begins to seem systemic, he can call another ConCon.
 
SpeckofStardust said:
No.

That train was you talking about giving them the power of purse, not just minor law making.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Your reply:

Us not having out Economy fall apart and personally being the reason why our allies economies also didn't fall apart despite the economic downturn being ???!!!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

has literally nothing to do with giving the Lower House the power of the purse in some future ConCon, which will happen anyway, nor does it bear any relevance to the equaling of powers between the houses. In a constitutional monarchy, the King retains a veto.

You're debating in bad faith, and I really don't appreciate that.
 
uju32 said:
That's what the King/Queen is for.
One-off situations, he/she intervenes.
When it begins to seem systemic, he can call another ConCon.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Right. Either the disagreements between the two houses will need a constitutional convention to resolve, or they won't. Since we need to have a Modern Democracy to do well, and since to give the LH power of the purse we need to first give the UH the power of purse...
 
Rakuhn said:
Right. Either the disagreements between the two houses will need a constitutional convention to resolve, or they won't. Since we need to have a Modern Democracy to do well, and since to give the LH power of the purse we need to first give the UH the power of purse...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To give the LH the power of the purse IN THIS CON requires giving it to the UH first.
That will not necessarily be true in a later ConCon.
Furthermore, I will note that a Modern Democracy is not incompatible with a constitutional monarchy.
Adhoc vote count started by uju32 on May 21, 2018 at 7:27 PM, finished with 585 posts and 68 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Inserted tally
Adhoc vote count started by DocMatoi on May 21, 2018 at 7:21 PM, finished with 579 posts and 66 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Xepheria said:
Your reply:



has literally nothing to do with giving the Lower House the power of the purse in some future ConCon, which will happen anyway, nor does it bear any relevance to the equaling of powers between the houses. In a constitutional monarchy, the King retains a veto.

You're debating in bad faith, and I really don't appreciate that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Says the person who was stating he was only talking about giving both houses minor law making yet 6 posts up was talking about giving the upper house purse.
Which when you asked what we get out of it, well compared to the sketch who have we managed to keep ourselves and our allies out of economic collapse, while they didn't.
 
SpeckofStardust said:
Says the person who was stating he was only talking about giving both houses minor law making yet 6 posts up was talking about giving the upper house purse.
Which when you asked what we get out of it, well compared to the sketch who have we managed to keep ourselves and our allies out of economic collapse, while they didn't.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

My question to marlin was about potential goodies of keeping both of the houses at minor lawmaking.

You conflating that with the sketch and our current situation comes completely out of the blue, and frankly, bears no relevance to the conversation I was having. The Sketch have laissez faire capitalism, which meant they were heavily affected by the economic crash. Laissez faire capitalism is not a system of governance, and the two are completely separate issues.

Once again, debating in bad faith. Really pissing me off.
 
SpeckofStardust said:
Says the person who was stating he was only talking about giving both houses minor law making yet 6 posts up was talking about giving the upper house purse.
Which when you asked what we get out of it, well compared to the sketch who have we managed to keep ourselves and our allies out of economic collapse, while they didn't.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That has nothing to do with their government and everything to do with their economics. Like the fact they didn't have a central bank, or really any kind of regulations on their economy, whereas we had the Crown Bank to tank the damage from the crash
 
SpeckofStardust said:
Says the person who was stating he was only talking about giving both houses minor law making yet 6 posts up was talking about giving the upper house purse.
Which when you asked what we get out of it, well compared to the sketch who have we managed to keep ourselves and our allies out of economic collapse, while they didn't.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sketch didn't suffer market crash because they empowered their Parliament, they suffered it because they had unregulated maximum capitalism. Correlation does not equate to causation.
 
[X] Plan And Lawmaking for All
-[X] [UH] +1 PW - Minor lawmaking
-[X] [LH] 4 PW - Minor lawmaking (+1 Temp Happiness)
-[X] [Assembly] 2 PW - Broad (+1 Happiness, Min. Consciousness from Education Increased by 1)
-[X] [Press] 2 PW - Free press (-1 Temp Happiness, Min. Consciousness from Education Increased by 1, Academic Freedom Provides Half Consciousness to Innovation)
 
HanEmpire said:
Sketch didn't suffer market crash because they empowered their Parliament, they suffered it because they had unregulated maximum capitalism. Correlation does not equate to causation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
…
Academia Nut said:
Yeah, see, what you see as unified response is the fact that the internal factions frequently look the same from the outside. Like, the HEKC basically runs itself with no input from the crown but can still draw upon the Army and Navy if it needs to in exchange for pumping in large amounts of SoL. The business elite sort of do their own thing using government resources half the time, it is just that maximizing IC and SoL are considered a goal in of themselves, so the government doesn't care that their resources are being used like that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
When the Parliament members are the ones running the economy via mostly governmental means (which everyone wants to copy) Then yes it is.
 
SpeckofStardust said:
When the Parliament members are the ones running the economy via mostly governmental means (which everyone wants to copy) Then yes it is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What are you talking about? The quote you're using says that the businesses operate independently from government control, and that the use of public funds is a form of tolerated abuse. Nowhere does it say that the Sketch operate on State Capitalism. Their Parliament does not control the economy.
 
HanEmpire said:
What are you talking about? The quote you're using says that the businesses operate independently from government control, and that the use of public funds is a form of tolerated abuse. Nowhere does it say that the Sketch operate on State Capitalism. Their Parliament does not control the economy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He is saying that the Sketch business elite control Parliament, and are thus able to leverage government assets in the military and diplomatic service to private ends. Nothing about government money, and everything about government clout.

It's not State Capitalism.
Adhoc vote count started by uju32 on May 21, 2018 at 7:59 PM, finished with 599 posts and 71 votes.
Click to expand...
 
HanEmpire said:
What are you talking about? The quote you're using says that the businesses operate independently from government control, and that the use of public funds is a form of tolerated abuse. Nowhere does it say that the Sketch operate on State Capitalism. Their Parliament does not control the economy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The nation of business men are ran by business men, with all parts of the government (Including the fucking military) is thus useable by said business men without complaint and without oversight from other parts of said business man ran government.
 
SpeckofStardust said:
…

When the Parliament members are the ones running the economy via mostly governmental means (which everyone wants to copy) Then yes it is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Are you being obtuse on purpose? We're the ones people currently want to copy because we tanked the collapse, not the sketch
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top