• 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.
Well, exam week sort of sneaked up on me. So until next Friday I'm only going to really be able to work on the Presidents on weekends. :(

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a chemistry exam to fail. :D
 
What we are seeing in modern America, is the destruction of the very market capitalists and industrialists claim to support, through secretive and exploitive behind-closed-doors dealmaking these men attempt to establish a grand monopoly, comparable in scale to the British East India Company that was very recently abolished. This alliance seeks to undermine the very system on which our economy operates and obliterate any and all competition with the sincere intention of establishing a permanent and powerful stream of revenue into the pockets and bank accounts of the very few, this at the expense of every other investor, builder and proper businessman in this country.

What is needed is Action! Decisive and immediate ACTION! With the blessing of the American people it is the job of proper government to see an end to this most threatening situation, to see an end to this most perilous of economic manipulations, to see an end to Mr Howards gang's stranglehold of Washington D.C.

How do we do this? How are the American people going to achieve this? Through the simple and brilliant process of democracy, while the fat-cats may invest thousands in the politicians who will support them ultimately they cannot buy your vote, simply by voting Libertarian you can save your work, your job, your independence as a human. And if you do not do so then don't be surprised as the corporate dictatorship of the bourgeois envelopes everything about this United States that you love and cherish.

With this merger we are investing in more jobs, promoting exports and bringing efficiency to our shipping industry. You stick to complaining, while we make progress.

Myself, Mr Rutledge and Mr Orange have all agreed to this merger so far. We are waiting on word from Mr Callahan and Mr Jarvis.
 
Well, exam week sort of sneaked up on me. So until next Friday I'm only going to really be able to work on the Presidents on weekends. :(

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a chemistry exam to fail. :D

((That sucks. Well good luck, we all have faith in you to at least get a passing grade so this can continue without stress :D))
 
((Hah, an extra week for me to subject the American People to my tyrrany! :) ))
 
Okay. To prevent wildly off-topic convos during my absence, Qorten and I have decided that the Presidents will be closed from noon on Monday till Thursday evening.

Just warning you beforehand.
 
With this merger we are investing in more jobs, promoting exports and bringing efficiency to our shipping industry. You stick to complaining, while we make progress.

Myself, Mr Rutledge and Mr Orange have all agreed to this merger so far. We are waiting on word from Mr Callahan and Mr Jarvis.

Progress for whom though? Yourself or the people of America? Honestly please.
 
Progress for whom though? Yourself or the people of America? Honestly please.

Progress for America! We create thousands of jobs, export more American goods (creating more jobs) and make our shipping industry a rival to britains. This merger will have a domino effect on our economy. It will be a huge boost to our industry and economy. What's wrong with that?
 
Progress for America! We create thousands of jobs, export more American goods (creating more jobs) and make our shipping industry a rival to britains. This merger will have a domino effect on our economy. It will be a huge boost to our industry and economy. What's wrong with that?

Well, you're a capitalist so, you're, uh, uh, you're evil, and stuff! Ya!
 
I think perhaps the Governor is concerned about the centralization of economic planning for so much of the nation's industry. It is an illusion of earlier days in this century that just the fact that the name on the door isn't that of a government makes a bunch of men sitting in a room in an office making economic decisions for huge swathes of industry hundreds of miles away not a form of central planning, just as proposed by Vandrove and his revolutionaries.

The difference between his politics and yours is not that it is somehow better when the upper classes do it than when the working classes achieve it through a vote, because you are only able to do it because of specific laws implementing the same broad ideas in the constitution that inspire me and my constituency to push for more employee control of industry. No, the legal status of your corporations and your ability to merge are just as much legal constructs as any government instituted commune or nationalization of industry. The only vital difference between you men and Vandrove is that you achieved, by the ballot, this state of affairs.

I will never be able to stomache the injustice each time you scorn the attempts of Libertarians to change the economic system through their vote and each time that you falsely insinuate that you achieved your places without government help or that your system is the one envisioned by the Founding Fathers - political blackmail and an example of how inflammatory the Vice President was even when trying to apologize to me, of the level of entrenched fanaticism you even respectable men have for your chosen ideology. HOWEVER, while your system is just as centralized and state-created and different from the Founder's intentions as Mr.Vandroves, unlike Mr.Vandrove you all had the decency to achieve this system through the ballot. For that I respect you.

I will always wonder though; if the day ever comes, as it did when industrialists began changing the laws of this country to their current state, that the system is changed by the ballot - and to something closer to what Vandrove imagines - I wonder if you will be as quick to make the distinction between the electoral actions of the Libertarians or another progressive party as I am to make the distinction between democratically-achieved totalitarian economics such as your own and Vandrove's attempts to achieve that same totalitarianism through violent and undemocratic means.

It is easy to respect the law when it favors you, but it will be interesting when the day comes to see if you respect the law just as much when it violates your own narrow and self-centered notions of what this nation should be.

That is a test of mettle that each day every Libertarian faces; and I often wonder if there would be as many New Democrats and Republicans who resisted the urge to pick up a rifle against a democratically elected socialist state as there are Libertarians who have resisted the urge to pick up rifles against our democratically enacted capitalist state.

We have proven our own loyalty to the Constitution by respecting a democratically instituted capitalist system and attempting to change it through the means the Constitution provides, the ballot. The same proof of loyalty has not been shown by the capitalists. It's not your fault, you've just never had the opportunity to either rise to the occasion or fail it.

Just keep in mind; every time you hear a Libertarian platform and feel you have the right to call it treason and use force against it, you are having the exact same feelings of selfish entitlement and fanaticism as Eric Vandrove and the Anarchists.

Perhaps instead of looking down on Libertarians as potential revolutionaries, you should be more worried about how many members of your own ranks would take arms against the Constitution should the day ever come that a Libertarian platform is enacted in this country.
 
Bachmann rebuts a speech on militancy and government philosophy:

The country's constitution stipulates all men (or women) have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This idea is one of the core tenants of Adam Smith, the founder of our interpretation of capitalism, John Locke, and Thomas Paine. Capitalism is in the lines of our constitution, and the rights of the citizens against a big oppressive government a core tenant. Unless you propose destroying government and creating a stateless range of commune work (where the lazy louts will hamper society), you propose a government run socialist state. A state which would control our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. The call for a strong socialist government will be morally wrong, and unconstitutional, until an amendment is passed which changes our unalienable rights.

I do not argue that we stand as belligerent against socialism as you capitalism, but I say that we stand within the confines of our constitution more than you do. I will be the first to say we are not a Democracy. We are a glorious Republic, with its roots in personal freedom and freedom of trade. A Republic is placed to protect the minority against the majority, everyone is a minority in this world. Should we make everything completely Democratic and Stateless, I warn of the consequences to each an every individual.

Socialism/ Vinogradism/ Communism/ What have you is unconstitutional, is naive in the confines of what it is proposed to accomplish, and cannot/ nor will be the dominating economic/ political entity of this nation


Freedom of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness!
 
Well said, Senator Bachmann!

Let us remove ourselves from this topic, and discuss a more pertinent, and more worrisome, matter: this Anarchist movement...

I agree with the President wholly on this issue, that we should have discourse with those who are willing to negotiate and offer input; however, if they continue to advocate violent revolution, murder, assassination, and violence in general, they must be dealt with in full force. I have said many times, that I support entering negotiations, but I will, nor will this administration, not long bear an organtisation advocating violence and upheaval, without even attempting to change the system through either legal, or electoral, channels!
 
I say, let the FBI have their way with this Anarchist Movement. Already they have caused disruption in both my Uncle's and now President Mandrake's terms, this must stop. The assassination of prominant political figures, and attacks upon the police of our nation should not go unpunished. Democracy and Liberty will stand triumphant against these terror attacks the Anarchists have employed.
 
By all accounts, the creation of militant anarchism would be caused by the anti-socialist forces who choose to result to violence rather than politics. This is just another reason to fight against the Libertarian cries of Socialism and Vinogradism. Anarchism could also by the most extreme of vinogradists as to be communist, they must be fought with equal ardor.

(every time I think of Libertarians being Socialist...)
 
With this merger we are investing in more jobs, promoting exports and bringing efficiency to our shipping industry. You stick to complaining, while we make progress.

Myself, Mr Rutledge and Mr Orange have all agreed to this merger so far. We are waiting on word from Mr Callahan and Mr Jarvis.

((You may not have gotten the subtle warning my character has made against the idea of large and monopolistic companies, so here it is: No Thanks.

Besides, it's Eamon's brother (a Confederate exile) that owns the family firm. If you're still interested in a Bermuda-based company that has ties to the Confederate government-in-exile, I suppose you could have it IC.))

Well, exam week sort of sneaked up on me. So until next Friday I'm only going to really be able to work on the Presidents on weekends. :(

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a chemistry exam to fail. :D

((I hear water is H2O. Study assisted!))

By all accounts, the creation of militant anarchism would be caused by the anti-socialist forces who choose to result to violence rather than politics.

((This is precisely the implication I've been making.))
 
(You know the guy who walks into a bar and orders H2O? The guy next to him says "That sounds good, I'll have H2O to". Second guy dies.)
 
I find myself in total agreement with Martin Beukes, in order that this principle can be implemented I propose the following item of legislation:

The Anti-Monopoly Act

Article 1. The Federal Government shall have the power to forbid the mergers of any companies that shall enjoy a market share greater than a level to be set by Congress.

Article 2. The States legislatures shall have the power to split-up any company which is seen to possess an uncontrolled monopoly, in line with regulations to be set by Congress.

Article 3. The President may decide companies which are vital to the nation’s interest to be exempt from Articles 1 and 2.

Article 4. If a company believes that the powers granted in Articles 1 and 2 have been exercised unfairly then they may seek judicial review.
 
I find myself in total agreement with Martin Beukes, in order that this principle can be implemented I propose the following item of legislation:

The Anti-Monopoly Act

Article 1. The Federal Government shall have the power to forbid the mergers of any companies that shall enjoy a market share greater than a level to be set by Congress.

Article 2. The States legislatures shall have the power to split-up any company which is seen to possess an uncontrolled monopoly, in line with regulations to be set by Congress.

Article 3. The President may decide companies which are vital to the nation’s interest to be exempt from Articles 1 and 2.

Article 4. If a company believes that the powers granted in Articles 1 and 2 have been exercised unfairly then they may seek judicial review.

What are the numbers we are talking about with the Market share? Considering that Mr Jarvis is not going to be part our deal, I don't see how we would control the Market.

Even if Mr Jarvis and Mr Callahan don't agree to the deal, I am still willing to heavily invest in this new venture.
 
Governor Glynne, while I may support the idea of opposing monopolies, I think that government intervening in the market is far more dangerous for the people.

Article 1. This idea that the government can forbid a legal transaction is contrary to the foundations of this nation, and that the Congress will arbitrarily set a level, a percentage for no company to go over would be a major impediment to growth.

Article 2. I have no problem with a state legislating against a monopoly, but it seems to be a great deal of government intervention.

Article 3. Are we to decide the winners and losers of the market as well? This could very easily be abused by an unscrupulous administration.

Article 4. That this bill,I believe, is unconstitutional would warrant such a review.

Personally, a non-government backed monopoly rarely lasts more than twenty years, as competition will always arise... if we support the free market. This legislating against the free market to protect it is, in my opinion, foolhardy and presents a whole new set of challenges.

And Mr. Howard, I am sorry to inform you that my sons have both declined on the deal, since they are concerned about monopolizing the industry. I am happy that my sons see the use of competition and innovation. However, they are still offering deals and contracts...