Join the new world

Please help the Economist: Vote and Subscribe



Leaders ~ Editorial

Good evening, and welcome to the latest (late) edition of the Economist. Over the next two weeks or so we will be going to print late, due to personal constraints on my time. I apologise for any inconvenience, hopefully it will be back to normal for me soon. We will also be publishing in the United States this week, partly just to give our cousins across the sea a taste of Britain, and partly because we're recruiting a US editor to write our Lexington column, and getting one would be easier if they knew what the Economist was. For our American audience, any apparent mistakes in spelling are probably deliberate.

This week has been a slow one in British politics, with only the mild excitement of the Party President elections to liven things up. We've seen the introduction of the new Wellness Fast program- hopefully clinics will start dealing out moving tickets on the 17th, once we transfer funds. We've also seen a renewal of the House of Lords reform debate. For those of you who are unaware of the current system, Lords are proposed by one of the Presidents of the top five parties, and then to become a Lord must receive unanimous approval of all the top five Party Presidents (PP). Since the rejection of Bob Boblo last month, there have been several amendments to the legislation proposed, including reducing the PP quota from unanimity to 4/5, allowing cabinet to select Lords, and several others. The debate has been bumped back onto the agenda by People's Communist Party (PCP) Member of Parliament (MP) Rastari. We'll see how the debate goes. The Economist is not taking a position on the issue, but feels that every effort should be made to make all members of government accountable to the public if not elected by them.

In addition there was the resurrection this week of an old but out-of-use policy: the British Academy. The concept is that citizens would be eligible to receive awards in up to four different categories: Journalism, Politics, Programming and Economics. All of these areas are ones with low recognition in the new world, and we feel that this is a good move. There are many talented young people in the new world, for whom a prize from the academy would mean a lot. We praise this worthy endeavour.



Leaders ~ Party President Elections

This week the UK political parties went to the vote to decide who would lead them. There was much more drama than usual, and all the major parties are now led by younger players, mostly from the 2009 generation. Most controversially the UKRP is now led by a citizen under a week old. Let us suffice to say Marcus Antonius won with forty percent of the popular vote, and that the editor was amongst those who raised an eyebrow at the victory of a relative newbie. The huge number of new members standing for political office has led us to direct a division of Economist elves to investigate the matter further.

In the author's own party the fight for leadership was a close one. Only three votes decided that I would continue in my term as Party President, showing the huge talent of John Forseti, the other contender. All in all, the turnout was higher than expected by around twenty votes, which is possibly indicative of the TUP's growing presence in the eUK.

The PCP decided their candidate in-forums. When it went to the vote, Dan Fallows received an embarrassingly low vote, leading to accusations that the PCP were moving to other parties to try and influence the result. Bob Boblo, the previous leader, denied any official decision on the matter. If this is the case then the 53 votes cast in the elections represents an all-time low for the party, with TUP (who had the highest turnout) polling more than double the votes. Either way, the PCP now has a new leader, who is fairly quiet in the main forums and in-game. It will be interesting to see how Dan Fallows, who is most famous for delaying Final Destiny's impeachment for a week, will handle the new office he holds. This publication so far reserves judgement, but has been assured that Dan is a strong candidate and well respected within the party.

The MDU suffered a lot this week. Thehorseltd and Oexis, the party Chairman and former leader respectively, both left. This comes in the midst of a wave of desertions to the bigger parties. New leader Robalbinio will have a difficult task rebuilding the party, which slipped from a long held fourth position into fifth this week. It is difficult to predict how the party will react to this collapse at the top, but we can expect a change in direction and a fresh outlook.

The IFTP elections were won by Goku Jones, a well known libertarian and imperialist. The author has to admit that he appreciates Goku's unique brand of journalism, which combines a frank view of British politics with an almost vitriolic assault on the established political contenders. Reading his newspaper is certainly good fun, but so far he seems to be taking party leadership very seriously. The newly elected President changed the name of the Party to the Radical Freethinkers Alliance, and intends to cement its place as a centrist party with an almost anarchist view on personal liberty.

Finally, the LSD elections were won by former TUP member Soultrader, who has become a strong advocate of the new party. Since the initial burst of interest in the party there has been a slump in membership, with two of the founders moving to the Philippines. It will take a strong and determined leader to break through party apathy and lead the party to greatness once again.

So good luck to the new leaders, this is going to be a tough month for all. The UKRP will have perhaps the toughest challenge, as whoever they field for the Presidency will have to face an incumbent PM. Defeat at the hands of TUP member Malta_1990 could signal and end to their dominance of the Presidential elections. A victory is necessary if their supremacy is to be maintained.



Britain ~ Taxation Changes

Those of you watching the country administration will have noticed a drop in import taxes being proposed. Malta_1990, the current country President (Prime Minister) ran on a strong financial platform. We are very pleased that he has taken the advice the Economist gave in our 19th February edition and proposed this drop in import taxes.

So what will the new system mean for the country? Well currently our oil and wood markets are monopolised by those construction and moving ticket companies who own 'feeder companies' to supply themselves. They own the wood company which supplies their mother company with raw materials. This is good for them, but provides no incentive for new businesses to be formed. These new laws will allow foreign wood and oil businesses to import into the British markets. Due to the UK having only medium resources, the taxes have been set at 45% and 50% to limit the profitability of foreign business and prevent them from undercutting home grown business.

The increased competition on the market will mean more competition, higher wages and a stronger economy. It will also mean that there will be a stable source of wood and oil for smaller businesses to rely on. To the common man, it will mean a stronger and more stable economy, which is better for everyone. To the government, it will mean greater investment in the country, which will mean higher GDP and therefore higher income and more employment. So all round, a good decision by a new President.



Bagehot ~ House of Lords reform

UKRP Party President is now four day old Marcus Antonius Varias. Speculation has been raised about the authenticity this election with cries of potential take-overs in the future. For now, however, I am happy to accept the veracity of all the party presidents and wish them luck.

However, sparked by this election the House of Lords reform has been raised again. At the moment the law states that a unanimous decision amongst the top five Party Presidents is required to create a Lordship. Previous debate (sparked by the previous congressional election) centred around two main, alternative amendments, with now a third possibility thrown in the mix. Firstly the reduction of the unanimity to a majority of all but one and the inclusion of the Country President in that vote and secondly, maintaining unanimity but the inclusion of the CP in the vote for possible lord candidate. Both alternatives make it necessary for at least three party presidents to vote or else the vote is void. The final possibility is a unanimous vote but with the possibility of a HoC vote to approve the nomination should just one party president vote against the nomination.

Both sides of the debating table disagree with the others’ proposed amendment. Creating a majority rule instead of the unanimous decision currently required is being criticised as reducing the necessary rigour with which lords should be chosen. The position being such an important one that nothing less than a unanimous decision is sufficient for such a role. However, the camp in favour of the reduction of the unanimous rule stand by their belief that a majority of all but one is more than sufficient to decide upon a Lordship candidate. They also argue that a unanimous decision is excessive as it allows the filling of important seats in the House of Lords to be held up by a single Party President, a role which has no criteria for any party member to assume.

Both sides of the discussion stress the need for their respective amendments and that both would reduce the risk of partisanship when the Party Presidents decide upon a House of Lords candidate.

All three options will go for a vote to the House of Commons in the coming week with a fourth option of having none of the amendments. Regardless of the outcome past and recent events have highlighted the clear risk that the in-game system exposes us to and so the need for a reform. However, with few congressmen commenting on the issue, the outcome of the Commons vote will be interesting.

Scipio the Great



Europe ~ Unrest amongst the troops?

This week saw the utter collapse of the chain of command in the German military, the Bundeswehr. Minister of Defence MortenLond has resigned his post in opposition to the Rorlikson Doctrine, a plan put in place by new Country President Starkad Rorlikson to divide the military into four divisions. The doctrine was apparently intended to imitate the real life divisions that we see deployed by most countries- air force, navy, army and special forces. However, the air force, navy and army forces would essentially have the same function and wouldn't be divided up by strength, which seems to us (and to Morten) to be pointless.

However, the drama comes not from the resignation but the way it happened. It was done in the media with no prior warning, and accompanied by a damning condemnation of the German President: unprofessional by any standards. In addition the Minister had been avoiding contact with the government for the four days previous to the resignation, which added to the impact. MortenLond's soldiers made the following statement:

“We have one message to the German government and to President Rorlikson: Let the professional soldiers handle the military affairs, whilst the politicians deal with politics. Do not make the mistakes of the past, and let the experienced and committed military commanders decide how they, from experience, feel how to best run a national army.”

We do understand his point, but the means of delivering it weren't ideal. A quiet word with the President and a quiet resignation would do less damage to the government and to the state. However we would like to take this opportunity to discuss the military in a purely informal way. The Romanian military appears to be based on nine divisions, with three major divisions and six almost private companies. This system works for them because of the personal loyalty soldiers have to their division and because of the almost continuous combat experience Romanian troops receive. We believe that this model, combined with aggressive and continuous recruitment, is necessary for any state to function. So military reforms, yes. The ones currently proposed in Germany, no.



Asia ~ Romania marches onward

Romania's campaigns continued in Asia this week, with their advance into Pakistan and India seemingly unstoppable. Now Romania finds itself with a land border with Iran, something which would shock newcomers to the game who have some understanding of global geography. So where next for the superpower? Well Xingjiang province is too heavily fortified by banned multis and a Q5 defence system for Romania to overcome. Iran itself is a poor target, as the MPP activation would disadvantage Romania by forcing them to fight all of Peace simultaneously. So the obvious solution is a march southwards, along the coastal regions of India. The goal would be to close off Indonesia access to Asia and then slowly reassert Romanian control over the remaining Indonesian provinces.

Romania needs a situation of constant war to maintain it's army by constantly ranking up and gaining experience. If the Asian wars end with Romanian victory, a series of resistance wars to release unimportant regions back to their original countries is likely. Pressuring Japan to join Atlantis is a political avenue which should be pursued. Trapped between Romania and the USA, the tiny and mostly inactive state would do well to either become neutral or declare for Romania. Other casualties of the war will be the small new states in South-East Asia. Indonesia itself has very poor natural resources, and the expansionist policy it holds is based on that as much as a desire for war. The Philippines and the other new states are very vulnerable to Indonesian interference. It will be interesting to see whether they throw in their support behind Indonesia to stave off this fate, or attempt to MPP with some of the stronger Atlantis nations.



Business News ~ A new Banker on the block

Arthur Wellesley created a new bank recently, the latest in a long line of bankers. But why do banks have such short shelf lives, and will this one be any different? Our own President, Malta_1990, was once the leader of the Bank of Newcastle, which is currently not trading. The difficulty is that banks are high maintenance low profit things to run. For new players to few gold profit is attractive, but to older players the desire to spend hours managing a bank is reduced, especially when much easier methods of acquiring wealth are available.

The true problem is the lack of in-game support for the basic tools of a tertiary (service) economy. The economics whizzes amongst you will have noticed that the game is intrinsically biased towards a socialist system. Nationalised industries are more productive. The larger your company is the more unmanageable it becomes. There is no real option for hiring management, or support staff. Banks and Stock Exchanges do not exist as part of the in-game experiences. Despite the efforts made by various individuals, organisations such as these always struggle. There isn't even a function for reselling goods in-game, leading to the rise of merchant traders, who re-sell used houses and so on. A virtual marketplace and virtual banks would not only enrich the game but would also break the state monopoly on finances.

But what if you want to go and start a bank now? What tips can we give? Don't loan gold unless it is backed by assets. Don't loan more than the net worth of the customer. Don't invest in a company unless it is big enough to liquidate assets to repay you. Always ask for a repayment schedule, and make sure your contract is admin-approved. Use the monetary markets to your advantage. Remember that if you're taking someone else's money you're risking your reputation. A bad reputation can be the end of a bank, and if you default on a payment your career in banking will be over.

For a sound bank, visit Wellington Chase. For financial advice, visit the Centre for Financial Affairs



**The Economist**


Top Ten Countries by Population

1.United States
2.Romania
3.Indonesia
4.Hungary
5.United Kingdom
6.Croatia
7.Spain
8.Canada
9.Poland
10.Brazil