A Popualr Girl's Diary

Recently, I became president of the Libertarian Party. Some members were disillusioned about what had become to the group. It had deteriorated to a free-market party without anything substantial to offer the nation. I have some ambitious plans for the party, which might include changing the name.

Make no mistake. In real life, I am a libertarian. I believe in social and economic freedom. Because government intervention normally hurts the economy, smaller government spending/taxes leads to better economic growth. In other words, the reason I am libertarian is to ensure America keeps its position as the world's economic powerhouse while refusing to jeopardizing individual liberties.

Hold on to that last sentence. You see, I believe that should be the goal for eUSA. However, the best way to accomplish economic growth (individual liberties are more or less irrelevant) is not through laissez-faire policies.

I wrote an article for The Shady Lane that described how demand is low and supply is high in our country. This remains true today. The average citizen has been playing for a couple of weeks, keeps a low-paying job, and is trying to save as much money as possible. If you want to save money in the game, it costs about 1 dollar a day: just buy food. The problem is that there is no incentive to buy anything else. The lack of emphasis for non-elite players on wellness is part of the reason. Another part is that there simply is no real benefit of buying goods.

My point is that the eUSA's economy is not balanced like the realUSA's is. A laissez-faire approach is useless if the economy can't sustain itself. The government needs to step in when it can to make the total spending more or less equal to the salaries.

And people need to stop applying their real-world political ideas to the eWorld. Things are different here, people! When I first gained control of the Libertarian Party, part of the mission statement was to "show support to all lifestyles [and] efend civil liberties". WHAT LIFESTYLES? WHAT CIVIL LIBERTIES? That frustrated me to no end. That might be your view in real life, but a lot of it simply doesn't apply here in a simplified, unbalanced world.

The unemployment problem, worsened by the increase in invitations, is solvable. I started a Food Industry Training program that has, in three days, employed over 30 people. Basically, everyone should be able to get jobs. And since it's in the food industry, the money being paid to the trainees mostly go straight back into the market, helping the US economy. So, in addition to training these newcomers to get better jobs, Food Industry Training can guarantee ANYONE a job. If it becomes really hectic, I'll just buy an export license and start giving our surpluses to other nations.

It all comes back to the whole demand < supply subject, though. If we can't fix it -- and there are some of you who say we can't -- we need to at least embrace it. The Invisible Hand pushed me along to start my own bank (Neutral Bank) with that in mind. Everyone wants to earn money to start their own companies, so why not loan them the money so they can get straight to spending?

There needs to be a government-backed bank, one that will provide savings to people willing to place their money there. It would be AMAZING if we could loan to other nations, especially once the wars begin. Europe will have at least one major war. Why don't we take advantage of all that idle capital we have and loan it to other nations? That is, after all, how REAL America was saved from the Great Depression. Maybe the real life world is useful after all.

My last point -- damn, I wrote a lot -- is this: we need to make patriotism and US pride more of an issue. Not patriotism as defined by right-wing nuts today ("if you're against the war, you're against America"), no, not that. How about a national pride that gets pissed off that SWEDEN is dominating this game. How about we provide incentives for people to buy by convincing them to help their nation?

-Rhane