Join the new world

I've got a couple of comments/observations to make but I will split them between different comments so people can share their thoughts on each nice and neatly.

Firstly I think it will help to be a lot tighter on the language used - these aren't budgets, there's not yet been conversations about how budgeting might work/if we want to do it and there's routine overspend compared to what is donated. I've observed that using the term budget is creating confusion and people ask why people are voting certain ways etc.

I try to refer to them as donations schedules, i.e. a list of what donation laws will be proposed. If anyone has a clearer notion of what we might call them please pipe up!

Secondly :

Is there any rationale behind the Gov not wanting to donate direct to allies? We can pretty easily project what we will owe by the final week of congress, and the direct donates to Australia worked well, eAus were happy with it, and the donations saw as many / sometimes more 'yes' votes from Congress than other donations made across the term. Evidently it's been worthwhile and reassures people that our financial obligations to TW partners where the amount of cash involved justifies this, are being met.

It's a little more inefficient than direct transfers from the Bank of England and our partners do inform us how they'd like to handle thier tax revenue returns... If Congress want to do it, I've got no problem with that. However I would rather propose we manage tax revenue returns align with current expectations from our TW partners.

Thirdly :

A suggestion to Congress colleagues that we should schedule donations for rewards programs and so on but the approach being taken by gov on paying out is grossly unfair - https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/rewards-and-bounties-spending-daylight-robbery-2777465/1/20

I encourage Congresspeople who agree to vote no on donations going to MoD/DoM/StratCom until it is addressed, to my knowledge the conversation on this has not been taken further by Gov (feel free to tell me otherwise).

Air and Ground Support Schemes are covered by this article. It's really a perspective of what is fair and equitable and how we reward and encourage strategically critical aircraft and military rank growth for the UK - https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/mod-air-and-ground-player-support-scheme-analysis--2777806/1/20

I think the logic is flawed - if you focus on what money goes where its obviously iniquitous, I dont see how "but we want to pay for kills" justifies all the spending

Who has proposed lowering kill caps on the two schemes by the way?

LASTLY I suggest a donations schedule that looks something like this :

https://i.postimg.cc/rw9DmzrH/image.png

Last month about 7.5 mil entered the treasury so this is based on an assumption that is stable with extra BoE donates for flex.

The payments to TW allies are based on 10, 20, and 30 day averages plus the current debt position. (i.e. an estimate of new debt + current debt). I have not suggested donates to meet the full estimate as the real figures will fluctuate, but 4 to eAus and 3 to eEgypt will likely cover most of what is owed by the end of the term. eAus are tried and tested so it will depend on Egypt being happy to give it a go, but there's no reason they wouldn't 😃

Debate on this opened in Congress at 11:10 GMT, 27/03 (48hrs)

No to all donates being approved

No to money going to bounties and giveaways until they are relooked at and confirmed by congress.

I, as a long standing Congressmen, will be voting for all of them, as I have been, to support eUK players that are active and want to grow. Great work on the budget again Huey, everything looks good.

All donates agreed.

v + c

No donations should be approved until congress votes on each proposal

voted

yes to all gov Proposals

Yes to all

Yes

Donations always sound great.
But are there any plans so far?
I mean there is a lot of budget left. So why continuously asking for more?