California: Voting Record 2
Day 565, 10:14
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by Khaiyan
IMPORTANT:: Before I begin, I advise all those who haven't read my first voting record to do so now. Just clicky here! Thank you.
As promised, here is a continuation of my voting record. The following proposals were by no means easy to decide on, however I came to conclusion that would best reflect the interests of you, hard working citizens of the eUSA. As always, I am open to any constructive criticism so fire away if you have any thoughts!
***
Proposals:
The President of USA proposed a peace treaty with Sweden
Yes - Let's no obscure the underlining fact here. Sweden is the offender in the conflict against Germany. Knowing this I still voted in approval for two reasons. Sweden has and will always be a great ally of the eUSA, they clearly haven't expressed this good will towards other nations like Germany but as our President put it.."We can't be the world police". I don't understand the logic behind supporting Germany, which is predestined to fail, in turn for weakening our relations with a very supportive ally, Sweden. Secondly, Sweden agreed to end their feud with Germany. Unfortunately, they didn't keep true to their word which is very unfortunate. Future proposals regarding Sweden will be met with skepticism and will require a lot more than words to convince me.
The President of USA proposed a peace treaty with Poland
Yes - Poland agreed to the same clause as Sweden, that they would drop their hostility towards Germany. Unfortunately they displayed the same, disappointing attitude as Sweden. They didn't kept true to their word and as such, I will no longer be lenient when voting on future proposals regarding Poland.
President of Czech Republic has proposed an alliance with USA
No - I have always been in favor of helping, smaller and neutral nations establish a foothold in the growing world. Therefore I had no opposition against forming a MPP with the Czech Republic since it would love her to participate in our war games. However the agreement between our Ambassador to them and their President, was that they would pay 45 gold of the 60 needed for an MPP. However midway through the proposal, they stated the payments in reverse! I voted a definite NO as did a few other Congressmen. Those who voted early were unaware of this and voted in approval. The proposal was unfortunately passed.
Import Tax Reduced from 30% to 1% (Oil, wood, grain and moving tickets)
Yes - These taxes adjustments were implemented to ensure greater revenue for the US Government. As it stood before they were neither high or low, which was rather pointless (it's best to make the most of one extremity). Low import tax may sound damaging to the economy but by opening our doors to foreign competition, we are increasing the availability of cheap goods to our citizens. The rise in foreign goods will also mean more Government revenue through import tax. Of course, this proposal has the potential to backfire and drive domestic companies into bankruptcy, so the Congress will keep a watchful eye on how it progresses. Call this proposal a 'trial phase' if you will.
Do you agree with the proposal to issue 200000 USD for 1000 GOLD?
Yes - We print USD in exchange for gold on a regular basis. The Congressional Budget Office requires $200,000 to help support the various sectors in our country such as our military, and our welfare programs.
MPPs I voted for
I had the fortune to vote for MPPs with nations other than the Czech Republic, except these went smoothly and almost all Congressmen voted in approval. For a start, these nations actually kept to their word and distributed the cost of the MPP evenly (more on that below) and secondly, MPPs enable them to participate in our war games. Here's how much they paid (of the 60 gold needed) for the MPP.
Finland - 30
Bosnia and Herzegovina - All of it!
Croatia - 45
Greece - 30
***
Well, that concludes the second set of proposals I have voted on. Quite a handful compared to my first one right? So anyway, feel free to express your thoughts, I look forward to responding to them! And on a final note, don't forget to subscribe to my newspaper so that you are regularly updated with what I have to say.
Thank you California,
Thomas. Anderson
Freshman Senator California
Proud USWP Member
USNG 2nd Division, 6th Platoon
American Patriot
As promised, here is a continuation of my voting record. The following proposals were by no means easy to decide on, however I came to conclusion that would best reflect the interests of you, hard working citizens of the eUSA. As always, I am open to any constructive criticism so fire away if you have any thoughts!
***
Proposals:
The President of USA proposed a peace treaty with Sweden
Yes - Let's no obscure the underlining fact here. Sweden is the offender in the conflict against Germany. Knowing this I still voted in approval for two reasons. Sweden has and will always be a great ally of the eUSA, they clearly haven't expressed this good will towards other nations like Germany but as our President put it.."We can't be the world police". I don't understand the logic behind supporting Germany, which is predestined to fail, in turn for weakening our relations with a very supportive ally, Sweden. Secondly, Sweden agreed to end their feud with Germany. Unfortunately, they didn't keep true to their word which is very unfortunate. Future proposals regarding Sweden will be met with skepticism and will require a lot more than words to convince me.
The President of USA proposed a peace treaty with Poland
Yes - Poland agreed to the same clause as Sweden, that they would drop their hostility towards Germany. Unfortunately they displayed the same, disappointing attitude as Sweden. They didn't kept true to their word and as such, I will no longer be lenient when voting on future proposals regarding Poland.
President of Czech Republic has proposed an alliance with USA
No - I have always been in favor of helping, smaller and neutral nations establish a foothold in the growing world. Therefore I had no opposition against forming a MPP with the Czech Republic since it would love her to participate in our war games. However the agreement between our Ambassador to them and their President, was that they would pay 45 gold of the 60 needed for an MPP. However midway through the proposal, they stated the payments in reverse! I voted a definite NO as did a few other Congressmen. Those who voted early were unaware of this and voted in approval. The proposal was unfortunately passed.
Import Tax Reduced from 30% to 1% (Oil, wood, grain and moving tickets)
Yes - These taxes adjustments were implemented to ensure greater revenue for the US Government. As it stood before they were neither high or low, which was rather pointless (it's best to make the most of one extremity). Low import tax may sound damaging to the economy but by opening our doors to foreign competition, we are increasing the availability of cheap goods to our citizens. The rise in foreign goods will also mean more Government revenue through import tax. Of course, this proposal has the potential to backfire and drive domestic companies into bankruptcy, so the Congress will keep a watchful eye on how it progresses. Call this proposal a 'trial phase' if you will.
Do you agree with the proposal to issue 200000 USD for 1000 GOLD?
Yes - We print USD in exchange for gold on a regular basis. The Congressional Budget Office requires $200,000 to help support the various sectors in our country such as our military, and our welfare programs.
MPPs I voted for
I had the fortune to vote for MPPs with nations other than the Czech Republic, except these went smoothly and almost all Congressmen voted in approval. For a start, these nations actually kept to their word and distributed the cost of the MPP evenly (more on that below) and secondly, MPPs enable them to participate in our war games. Here's how much they paid (of the 60 gold needed) for the MPP.
Finland - 30
Bosnia and Herzegovina - All of it!
Croatia - 45
Greece - 30
***
Well, that concludes the second set of proposals I have voted on. Quite a handful compared to my first one right? So anyway, feel free to express your thoughts, I look forward to responding to them! And on a final note, don't forget to subscribe to my newspaper so that you are regularly updated with what I have to say.
Thank you California,
Thomas. Anderson
Freshman Senator California
Proud USWP Member
USNG 2nd Division, 6th Platoon
American Patriot
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
As a member of the Worker's Party, will you support changing the tax policy if these tax changes erode buying power for the every day worker? Something I noticed recently while traveling in eSpain is that my wages went so far... I could buy so much with one day's wages. I can't do much with one day's wages in the US and wages are and have been eroding further It seems like the rules of the game are set up to encourage protectionism and the silly idealism of the Right in Congress is going to suck for 2-clicking wage slaves.
@ Agent Nuro - These "tax changes" only adjust our nation's import taxes so they by no means reduce our citizens' buying power. A lower import tax, will increase the number of foreign goods in our market and often they are cheaper than domestic goods so you could argue that these tax changes will increase buying power.
If you are referring to income tax, well it's high unlikely they will be changed anytime soon. You see, a few months ago, one of our Presidents (Franco) made off with all the cash in the eUSA Treasury. Ever since we have followed the PANEC taxation plan which was brought about to make back the lost funds. If I intervened in this process by proposing lower income taxes, I will be met with firm disapproval.
Wouldn't though the increase of foreign goods, and thus the decrease in cost for buying said foreign goods, harm our resource gathering businesses making them have to lower their own prices to match the foreign competitors and lower our wages?
@ Kent - In some respect, yes. Bear in mind, however, that this was a reason as to why me and many other Congressmen voted in approval. This proposal will balance out the inflated wages of land-based jobs and will hopefully encourage these disgruntled employees to seek employment in our other 2 sectors (most importantly manufacture). Take a look at the job market, there are so few job offers for manufacture that offers such a high pay as land-based jobs. This needs to be fixed so that we have a balanced market, not a specialist market.
As for moving tickets, well domestic sales for it are generally low so we decided to see if foreign ticket companies will fare any better. As I said earlier, it's only a test phase so if anything goes horrendous, we will be quick to reverse our taxation plan to how it was before.
Good stuff TA!
I am a little nervous as well about lower import tax for all RM. Could it have not been lowered to say 5-8% first to see the results rather than jumping in with both feet? Wages coupled with lower RM are forcing many into bankruptcy already as evidenced by the number of companies for sale. And are other countries (our supposed allies) returning the favor with reduced import taxes?
@ Esme - As I said before, it's best to make use of one extremity or another. No point sticking to tax rates in the middle. Besides, 5-8% will provide very similar results to how it will now, at 1%. As for the point you make regarding well bankruptcy, don't forget most of those are poorly managed. A smart General Manager can still control his company by reducing his wages so that he can compete with foreign companies. I have stated in my previous comment why reduced wages in land-based jobs is good.
And yes, the allies (though not all) I am aware of have low import taxes. Though I don't really really see much benefit in this since the eUSA company would make few sales abroad, since foreign goods are cheaper to make and will be at sale at lower prices.
@ Prince - Cheers 🙂
Thanks for the voting record Thomas.
Thanks Ligtreb 🙂
An excellent voting report, Thomas. Even though we were on the opposite sides of the Swedish/Polish peace proposal vote, I am enthused that we still have a good working relationship. You also provide an solid defense of the reasoning behind the recent lowering of import taxes.
I have only silly question about your signature though. How can you be the junior senator from California? We don't have two per region. 🙂 Voted and subscribed.
Awesome job with transparency, TA 😃
There was just one issue: I realize the wording in the thread was very unclear, but it was never in the proposal for the CR to pay 45 of the 60 gold for the MPP. It started out with the reverse, in fact; we were originally going to pay 45 gold, and the CR would have payed 15 gold. In the end, we passed a 30/30 split.
@ Seth - Oops, by Junior, I meant Freshman. Corrected and thanks for the notice! 🙂
@ Kazeal - The general consensus in Congress was that we would pay 15 gold only. However, I agree, there was a sense of ambiguity to the proposal and even I as it seems, was under false assumption. That said, I would have still voted in disapproval due to the simple fact that:
a) We have nothing to gain from the MPP yet we would be paying more
b) We can only have 11 MPPs at one time, so I would have rather reserved this MPP for another nation
Regardless of my view, I still regard you as an outstanding Ambassador!
I didn't take offense at all 😉 People have their own views; there is no reason to be angry when they differ from my own. I accept your opinion, I'm just on an ongoing crusade against inaccuracy. I want the facts to be straight to avoid further confusion down the road 😉
Voted and already subbed 😉
Great voting record Thomas, thanks for the transparency.
Great to see you continue doing this.
Voted!
Cheers Quanah and Lorenzo! 🙂
California found a great replacement 😉
What do you think the chances are of California getting a Q5 Hospital? I'd love to move back to Cal since I live there in RL, but I like the Q5 hospital in the Garden State. Seems like we're a good candidate!