Join the new world

While I respect Adam Sutler’s past service as Canada’s president, I do take serious issue with the economic policies he has proposed. They seem to ignore some realities of today’s problems and the future they propound for Canada is somewhat undesirable.

To start with, let me describe the roots of the problems that Canada is currently facing. We are not in the grip of only one economic crisis: instead, three separate economic difficulties have coincided. Two of them we could trust the market to repair on its own but the third would require some government intervention. To ignore all three for any longer than we have now would be incredibly foolhardy.

The first problem we are undergoing is the market being out of proportion. This being the main item that Sutler has chosen to focus on, most are already aware of the fact that an unhealthy amount of Canada’s companies are producing Q1 goods. The reasons for this are fairly simple: a month or so back Canada had a large population boom. Recently, throughout the last few weeks, the people who joined Canada during this boom have been forming companies. The problem is that all of these companies started at Q1 (as is the norm) and haven’t really been given a chance to upgrade. Normally these companies would upgrade and, given time, distribute themselves in a fashion that would balance out the market. Currently, however, there is little capability for companies to make profits. This is due to the excess of competition in the Q1 sector and the following two issues.

The second crisis we’re facing is an excess of foreign competition. Anyone who has browsed our markets recently has noticed that Canadian companies are having a hard time competing with foreign companies. The cause of this is the exceptionally high price of the Canadian dollar. This is not exclusively a bad thing, I should note. Foreign competition drives prices down, benefiting consumers and it ensures that we will be supplied even when our demand exceeds our output (during a war, for example).

Normally, we could expect that GOLD leaving the Canadian market through imports would gradually erode the value of the dollar to a value where our companies would be able to compete. Currently, our economy has slowed down to an extent that this process will take nearly forever. This means that our companies, particularly Q1 start-ups, are deprived of some of few profits they can make meaning that there is very little potential for them to upgrade or for the market to right itself.

The third and most significant crisis that has exacerbated the other two is the complete lack of war until V1. The lack of even a potential war in the near future has caused demand for weapons to plummet to near-zero levels and has had similar effects on the moving and gifts industries. Salary cuts and complete shutdowns in these industries have lowered the demand for more expensive goods such as houses. Given time, this crisis will eventually cause a complete economic shutdown in nearly all industries. Needless to say, we cannot let this occur. And to prevent this, the government will need to step in.

Now, Sutler’s argument is that most of our current companies are unnecessary and we are justified in letting them die. I think that his definition of necessary is a bit too narrow. The figures he gave as to the minimum companies necessary for sustaining Canada are just that: the minimum. Letting the marketplace become less populated than that would be a mistake but that does not mean that we have to restrict our economy to those levels.

In fact, I would argue that at this juncture having more companies in all sectors will benefit Canada. Sutler himself serves as an example of why this is the case. He has recently mentioned that he was able to cut the prices on his Q4 weapons by $15 and still make significant profits. If we had more than one supplier of Q4 weapons competition would mean that the prices Canadians pay for their weapons would be greatly decreased. The same goes for all other markets and sectors thereof. An economy with the bare minimum of businesses is beneficial to the select few who own these businesses but is harmful to the average citizen. [This is not intended as an attack on Sutler’s businesses or ethics. I acknowledge and respect the fact that he uses the proceeds from his weapons company to fund non-profit trainers. This does not change the fact that a better-populated market would give Canadians lower prices]

I should also note that it is neither the government’s responsibility nor its privilege to determine which companies are necessary and which ones should die. This is the duty of the market and one that the market is currently incapable of accomplishing seeing as the current demand is not representative of the normal value.

What is basically going to happen is that companies are slowly and steadily going to have to shut down. The newly started companies will be first, as they face more competition for the few sales they will be able to make and their owners probably have less capital. Larger, higher quality companies are likely to survive longer because they face less competition, are run by people with a lot of capital, and are capable of making higher margins on their sales.

When V1 arrives, the markets will be returned to normal. Demand will increase and the first two problems we are facing will, in time, go away. The difficulty now is that if we arrive in V1 with a heavy toll taken on our businesses we will have a weak economy and be unable to capitalize on our natural resources. What we need to do is bridge the gap between here and V1 and keep our economy afloat for about two weeks. By an increase in government spending we will be able to provide a source of demand for struggling businesses and encourage greater circulation and spending. We want to come out of V1 with a strong, expanded economy and that’s not going to happen unless we enter V1 with a strong economy that is ready to expand.

So why should we implement this solution as soon as possible? We shouldn’t we wait for more of Canada’s companies to shut down? There are a few reasons, most of which I have already brushed over briefly, but here are the reasons in summary:

1. It is in the interests of Canada’s population to have an expanded and more competitive economy. Expansion only occurs from the ground up meaning that all expansion will have to start at Q1 and work its way up. This isn’t going to happen before V1 due to our current crises but allowing our Q1 companies to be run out of business right now will hurt our ability to expand in V1.

2. The government does not get to decide which companies live and which ones fail. It is a breach of public trust to decide that some companies do not have a right to operate and that only the larger, older businesses are entitled to help during a serious crisis. Sutler’s vision of Canada’s economy as being dominated by a few giants while other citizens are incapable of starting their own businesses is not in line with my political values and the economic freedom that should be present in Canada. Our ideal economy is not one entirely controlled by a few rich businessmen but rather one where any Canadian has the right and ability to start up their own company. The government should not have the power to judge some companies unworthy of existence and throw them off the boat.

3. A majority of companies closing up will not have a healthy effect on our economy. Mass unemployment and a cut in the amount of goods produced is never a good thing. If most employees that are fired are forced to work for trainers then the amount of goods we are producing will plummet. Obviously, that’s not good for us. Contrary to Sutler’s claims, our government trainers do not provide any assurance that we are prepared for any scenario. Full government employment is something absolutely horrible that will only occur when our economy is completely destroyed. I don’t want things to reach that point.

4. The line between useful and excess companies has already been crossed. Plenty of Canadian companies are running low on funds and have either shut down or are struggling to continue paying salaries. We can’t afford to delay indefinitely, hoping that some vaguely defined “dead weight” will disappear. The government has already been overly neglectful in letting things go this far. Any solution will take time to implement so we need to get started immediately.

As to what we should be doing, Michel’s plan fits our requirements perfectly. It counteracts the loss of demand caused by the lack of war and allows companies to start making actual profits due to increased circulation. A release of money into the market will slightly devalue our dollar and curb the effects of our second problem. The mortgaging program being worked on by Augustus Baldwin should increase circulation a bit more and bring more business to the housing market.

I apologize for the length that seems to plague everything I write but I hope that I have made the case for timely government intervention.