((No it was towards the trans-continetal plans. I will make sure you get a position that is related to the economy if I am elected. Your knowledge of industry is highly regarded.))
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
((No it was towards the trans-continetal plans. I will make sure you get a position that is related to the economy if I am elected. Your knowledge of industry is highly regarded.))
((Just to point out to everyone who says Britain doesn't want a unified Germany... Britian IS militarily allied with Prussia and now the NGF, so it's safe to say that IC they would support the unification as well.
And it looks like Jamous will be joing the anarch-socialists, or whatever they are called, in boycotting and abstaining from this election. None of the nominees are pro-Germany, unless Project is still pro-unification, though I would have to wait to see the manifesto))
And it looks like Jamous will be joing the anarch-socialists, or whatever they are called, in boycotting and abstaining from this election. None of the nominees are pro-Germany, unless Project is still pro-unification, though I would have to wait to see the manifesto))
((But it won't be enough to effect the manifesto enough to Jamous' liking. Really it seems like the Republican and current New Democrat stances are the same except for a slight different view on the economy))
((I support German unification and will commit financial support. However I'm not willing to send our troops to die in a foreign war. How could we support them in any other way? They won't ally with us.))
Last edited:
((I think there might have been a misunderstanding. Howard's policy is exactly the same as Jamous's, is it not?))
If only it was so simple, Mr. Clarke. In reality, if our destiny lies in the Americas, then surely Cuba is part of that destiny? Yet Cuba is held by Spain, a European power who is allied to France an even more powerful nation. And what about Canada? And Guam? Should we then not consider lands under the control of European powers part of the Americas? But then European countries need only to conquer land to take it from our sphere of influence? And what if another super-state forms in Europe? If Europe was united it could beat us easily. Surely then our foreign policy should be dedicated to preventing that?
Meddytov said:
If only it was so simple, Mr. Clarke. In reality, if our destiny lies in the Americas, then surely Cuba is part of that destiny? Yet Cuba is held by Spain, a European power who is allied to France an even more powerful nation. And what about Canada? And Guam? Should we then not consider lands under the control of European powers part of the Americas? But then European countries need only to conquer land to take it from our sphere of influence? And what if another super-state forms in Europe? If Europe was united it could beat us easily. Surely then our foreign policy should be dedicated to preventing that?
I am not necessarily pro- or anti-German, I just happen to be anti-interventionist and anti-nation building, which are the two tenants of imperialism. I have no qualms with peaceful trade relations with the Germans. As for the British being pro-German, they allied with Russia against Napoleon, but now the Anglo-Russian relations are cool, at best (considering a Crimean War, and who'll dominate China). So while the British may support Germany, more than likely to counter France, she will not long bare another major power on the continent.
As for your statement, Mr. Clarke, I support entirely the government protecting people from illegal behaviour from other entities, as it is proscribed as the government duties as such. Therefore, with the General's consent, obviously, I would call for harsher measures to be taken against those who are in violation of the law, though the states will have a more dominant role. As there is no need for massive expenditure in our nations infrastructure, we can and should increase spending on local authorities and prisons, as well as lower taxes and begin funding General Mandrakes education plan.
I personally am opposed to a high tariff rate, as it goes against my beliefs in the free market, so I would support tariffs being no higher than, say, five percent.
On subsidies, I am also opposed to them, since I believe that they are counter to enterprise and innovation, and will not promote such; rather, they breed inefficiency and dependence on the government.
However, as I am the vice-presidential candidate, I will defer my opinions to the General and only advise him as such.
Senator Henry J. Jarvis of California, Champion of the Constitution and Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate
As for your statement, Mr. Clarke, I support entirely the government protecting people from illegal behaviour from other entities, as it is proscribed as the government duties as such. Therefore, with the General's consent, obviously, I would call for harsher measures to be taken against those who are in violation of the law, though the states will have a more dominant role. As there is no need for massive expenditure in our nations infrastructure, we can and should increase spending on local authorities and prisons, as well as lower taxes and begin funding General Mandrakes education plan.
I personally am opposed to a high tariff rate, as it goes against my beliefs in the free market, so I would support tariffs being no higher than, say, five percent.
On subsidies, I am also opposed to them, since I believe that they are counter to enterprise and innovation, and will not promote such; rather, they breed inefficiency and dependence on the government.
However, as I am the vice-presidential candidate, I will defer my opinions to the General and only advise him as such.
Senator Henry J. Jarvis of California, Champion of the Constitution and Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate
Last edited:
((As you should all know, Benjamin Rutledge is pro-British and anti-German, going so far as to oppose unification. Stances that put him off voting for the New Democrats.))
Maryland opposes tariffs exceeding the four-percent mark, and strongly supports lowering taxes.
((Tariffs, taxes, land reform, Germans, Englishmen, the military, and agriculture. The most important issues to Mr. Rutledge.
))
Maryland opposes tariffs exceeding the four-percent mark, and strongly supports lowering taxes.
((Tariffs, taxes, land reform, Germans, Englishmen, the military, and agriculture. The most important issues to Mr. Rutledge.
))
Last edited:
You oppose unions, yet you support the UK. Which is a union.
Why are you anti-german and pro-British anyway?
I don't see how. Do you oppose the Italians because they want to unify their nation?
Britain did not smack down another power to force Scotland and Ireland into a union and did it with their consent. Not to mention a new Germany would have all those little princes and a monarchy with actual power and bollocks.
I never said I opposed national unification, but German unification. Italy is not as powerful as a unified Germany is.
I never said I opposed national unification, but German unification. Italy is not as powerful as a unified Germany is.
((I was also shooting in the dark with the railroad plan and with the tariffs because I was unaware of our finances or the extent of the railroads. If we have the highest level railroads available connecting east to west and north to south, then I will withdraw that from my platform. This is not, however, bursting my bubble because I still have the key parts of my platform. At any rate, if there is still room for the railroad plan, we will expand from both sides working to the middle, so say Virginia to California will get the benefit first. moving inwards to the plains states. I think a north to south plan should be two-tiered - one from New England down to the Georgia/Florida area, and one from Chicago/Indianapolis down to New Orleans and Texas. If BBB doesn't think it's necessary then we'll just cut it out.
In my platform it will say a 5% decrease in tariffs but this was more a placeholder number since I don't know where the tariffs sit. If they are around 5% I will drop them to 2%, if they are higher than 5% I will drop them by the said 5%, or to be no higher than 5% and no lower than 2%. Education, improved tax efficiency, business expansion and no alliances are the beef of my platform - anti-corruption, a 15,000 soldier reduction in the Army, improved training and arms for the military, expansion of the navy, limited subsidies, and agricultural policy improvements are the garnish, so to speak. ))
In my platform it will say a 5% decrease in tariffs but this was more a placeholder number since I don't know where the tariffs sit. If they are around 5% I will drop them to 2%, if they are higher than 5% I will drop them by the said 5%, or to be no higher than 5% and no lower than 2%. Education, improved tax efficiency, business expansion and no alliances are the beef of my platform - anti-corruption, a 15,000 soldier reduction in the Army, improved training and arms for the military, expansion of the navy, limited subsidies, and agricultural policy improvements are the garnish, so to speak. ))
No, instead the English pounded the Scotish for years until they had a pro English Goverment. Then they bribed Scotland's politicians and offered to pay for the ginormous catastrophe which was Scotish colonisation. As for the Irish- They took Practically all the native Irishs land and gave it to pro English protestants.
Oh did I meantion, that the native Scotish and Irish didn't want the union?
So what point are you making?
((Hmm, very nice. Ingame it would be best to have no alliances to avoid entanglement, it's just Benjamin Rutledge opposes the Germans and is pro-British. Neutrality appeals to him as well, however, and every other part of Mandrake's platform is agreeable.))
It seems the discussions has become heated. What I was saying was a unified Germany would be a very potent threat (and Benjamin Rutledge opposes them), but this has translated into something else. This is a contentious issue, so let us leave it be.
It seems the discussions has become heated. What I was saying was a unified Germany would be a very potent threat (and Benjamin Rutledge opposes them), but this has translated into something else. This is a contentious issue, so let us leave it be.
((Sorry if I sounded angry. I'm actually descended from one of those Protestant families the English sent to Ireland, but my little rant was to make a point.))
((When does the voting start?))
Last edited:
When I get Projekt's platform and write the update.
And yes, we have highest level railroads in all provinces.
And yes, we have highest level railroads in all provinces.
((GiVen that the Major issues hadn't changed much since the last election I was just going to use the same platform, especially since I'm really swamped by my AP classes right now. Thas why there has been a dramatic decline in my posting. I do howeVer still need a VP, If no one wants to be my VP can BBB write in a NPC to take the position. I Was hoping for Blindgoose to be my VP but he's been missing of late ))