[Opposition] Why the proposed bonds will fail - and how we can fix them
•
by Kazuo Leblanc
This point has been made several times over, but it's my hope that rephrasing the argument with detail, plus some of the YouTube, will help the message sink in.
A bond is a loan, plain and simple. One of the key things that you need in order to conduct a loan is to find someone who has enough confidence in you to give you the money. Now, I'm not talking about confidence in your abilities in the military module, nor am I talking about confidence in your writing ability. I'm talking about confidence in the ability to be repaid.
We see this in real life. You lend your friend $10 for gas because your friendship makes you confident he won't disappear. The bank lends you money for your new car because it's confident your desire to keep your car will ensure your continued payment.
Now, the bank will check other things to boost their confidence and certainty. They look at things, such as length of residence (less likely to disappear), income (more likely to afford), and references (able to be found to settle the debt). Investors who purchase bonds will look at the same thing.
Why am I stating this obvious tabarnaque? It's simple. The current plan to guarantee the proposed bond with the national treasury comes with uncertainty, and any uncertainty in a loan spells the death of that loan.
The gatekeepers of the national treasury, the only group that can access the funds used to guarantee the bond, is the in-game Canadian Congress that doesn't exist. This raises questions. When will this Congress reassemble? How will they feel that a decision was made earlier that can bind their future action?
Just the fact that we can ask these questions is enough to derail the bond. Just the discussion. Just the uncertainty is enough to scare off potential investors and cause the failure of a bond. When this bond fails, it will impact our national standing in the New World and cast a shadow over any future bonds Canada wishes to issue, diminishing our ability to raise funds.
The only people who will invest under these circumstances are patriots who don't care about getting their money back and would have donated anyway. Not only are we tapping them out, the past couple of months have demonstrated that it's simply not enough funds. We need to expand the reach of this bond to international investors in order for it to have a point.
How can we fix this problem? Simple. We just need to find another guarantor of the proposed bond. It can be a Canadian MU, it can be one really rich guy we all trust, it could be yo' momma for all I care. And the future Congress may choose to assume the responsibility for the bond once it convenes, letting the original guarantor off the hook.
Bonds are a great tool to advance our national goals. This particular one isn't.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I nominate Kazuo Leblanc. Who's with me?
Kazuo4CP! And guarantor, I guess.
JRB4CP
I retract my previous statement in favour of this one.
"The only people who will invest under these circumstances are patriots who don't care about getting their money back and would have donated anyway."
So, your solution is to have those same people guarantee bonds so opportunist types can REALLY screw over those with money in the game.
Armchair quarterbacks abound, only a few have the gall to pull this kind of crap....
If we are serious about raising money, and it is true that current donations have not been enough, then we need to expand the pool of investors to a group larger than Canadians who prioritize national liberation over a return on their investment. I'm not judging the people who have already donated - I've given 15 gold myself - but if it's true that we are being outspent based on the resources we have we need to bring in more people who have more money, more people than our current limited pool of Canadians motivated by kicking the US out of Canada.
The alternative is to scrap the bond and continue to solicit donations. The people who don't donate likely couldn't afford to invest in a bond, and the people who would invest in a bond with its current uncertain guarantee prioritize the war effort over getting their money back so we don't need to entice them with interest. Far less paperwork this way.
The fact is there are those of us who could guarantee bonds on behalf of the eCanadian people, but why would we when the government has the money to guarantee them sitting in the treasury? The fact is if Congress votes not to pay bonds that were issued it will be tantamount to political suicide, for them and the nation.
That's exactly my point, and the point others have been making for days. The point is that Congress has the ability to commit that political suicide because the decision to issue a bond would be done before Congress officially acted. There is nobody right now who can say, "As the person who can access the funds that guarantee you loaning me money, I accept responsibility." And just that uncertainty is enough to jeopardize the success of the proposed bond.
Straw.man.argument
The problem you're having is that you seem to be under the impression that the pool of potential Congressmen is large enough that if Congress doesn't support your unilateral decision to issue bonds backed by the gold in the treasury (which is what you are doing, referendum or not) "the people of eCanada" can simply elect an entire new crop the next month.
This is most certainly not the case.
There is an incredibly high likely hood that should you issue war bonds based on the gold in the treasury it will fail for 1 of 2 reasons.
Reason 1 is that it will be so distant in the future that the Congress at that time will feel no obligation to repay a debt incurred by a President who acted out of turn.
Or Reason 2 Congress will be re-established in the short term with eCanada getting on the map only temporarily, and just long enough for us to last through the election and by the time the debate is over we'll once again be wiped and Congress will vote no simply out of spite for you blowing our entire holdings simply to pay debts which you unilaterally decided we should accrue.
Now this makes more sense, but, fact remains the choice to participate has to have some motive of helping in the present situation.