• 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.
Didn't we establish neutrality on both Spanish sides? Such an embargo would be hypocrisy. I vote Nay.

- Senator Elexis Sinclaire
 
I echo Sinclaire's sentiment. I also vote nay on the embargo act, otherwise it is blatant hypocrisy on our part.

-Senator Clark Gable
 
Technically, the Spanish Embargo Act isn't eligible to be voted upon until a second Senator supports it.

Re: Espionage, I'll take the full blame for that one, except Mexico, in case we decided to get go crazy and invade them. Apart from upgrading the countries I did, as you can see above, I didn't change the defaults. I will correct this before the next update.
 
I also oppose the Spanish Embargo Act. Spain has not invaded a country as Italy did, nor should we meddle as this is a civil war.

Senator Charles Beckendorf, D-MA
 
To the President and the members of the Senate Intelligence Committee:

My staff have been reporting disturbing whispers about foreign conspiracies. Might I recommend that our new chief of intelligence direct the FBI to investigate and neutralize the sources of this unrest, to help unify our nation?

- Gen. MacArthur

((Between random events and the "fractured government" penalty, our National Unity has taken a decent-sized hit this year. If we ever want Heavy Industry Emphasis, we probably need to switch our domestic spies to the Raise National Unity mission. Not my department, I know, but I haven't seen anyone else address the issue yet.))
 
To the President and the members of the Senate Intelligence Committee:

My staff have been reporting disturbing whispers about foreign conspiracies. Might I recommend that our new chief of intelligence direct the FBI to investigate and neutralize the sources of this unrest, to help unify our nation?

- Gen. MacArthur

((Between random events and the "fractured government" penalty, our National Unity has taken a decent-sized hit this year. If we ever want Heavy Industry Emphasis, we probably need to switch our domestic spies to the Raise National Unity mission. Not my department, I know, but I haven't seen anyone else address the issue yet.))

((Good point, I hadn't seen the latest save as I've been busy but we really want Heavy Industry Emphasis - it's too good to pass up.))
 
Rudolf - Sinclaire 1937 Budget:

Leadership:

  • Officers: 0 The leadership currently invested in officers would be better used to modernize our techs
  • Diplomacy: 0.25 With all major trade deals in place and 111 diplomatic points in reserve this is all that the diplomacy budget needs to maintain current levels
  • Espionage: 1.5 Reduce priority on Mecixo and Canada to 1. Reduce the prioricty of France and Italy to 2. Reduce all other nations except for the UK, USSR, Germany and Japan to zero. This budget should be enough to maintain our operations in these nations.
  • Research: 32.18 A massive investment in research is necessary to bring us up to speed


Technology Plan:
As I have noted in my previous speech, we have fallen far behind in army and naval equipment while our industrial and air technologies are cutting edge. We must devote our main efforts to developing modern equipment for our army and better boats for our navy. Last year's budget has wasted too much on impractical technologies which cannot be full developed for years.

Cancel research on Decryption and Encryption machines, Carrier Group Doctrine 2, and Carrier Crew Training 2. These are all of no immediate use and too advanced to research easily. Finish everything else in the queue. ((note: our current progress will not be lost by cancelling research))

Priority Techs:
  • Infantry Techs (Infantry Support Weapons, Light Artillery, Infantry Anti-Tank Weapons) up to '36 levels. '38 levels if possible
  • Light Tank Engine '38. This and the other Light Tank techs will allow research of:
  • Medium Tank Brigade, to be followed by all the Medium Tank techs
  • All artillery should be upgraded to at least '36 levels
  • Aircraft Carrier Anti Air, Engine, and Hanger up to '38 levels
  • Upgrade Destroyers to '36 designs, '38 if possible
  • Upgrade Light Cruisers to '36 designs, '38 if possible
  • Upgrade Heavy Cruisers to '36 designs, '38 if possible
  • '38 boats should have priority as they take longest to build

After these crucial technologies are researched doctrines can be added if there is room. I would recommend starting with Operational Level Organization 1, Central Planning 1, Delay Doctrine 1, Mobile Warfare 1, and Operational Level Command Structure 1. Distribution of any other spare research is left to the discretion of the President and Chiefs of Staff.


IC Distribution:
  • Upgrades: 0 As we will be researching many new designs upgrading should be left until next year when they are complete
  • Reinforcement: 1.00 this should bring our reinforcement requirements down to 0 by the end of the year.
  • Supplies: 0 as none are needed
  • Consumer Goods: 61.97 or whatever is required for zero dissent
  • Production: 90.0 or the remainder

Production Plan:
Examining our situation reveals that our naval and land designs are obsolete. Therefore, this year we should only produce airplanes and buildings, focusing on naval and ground forces next year when better designs are available. The production regime is as follows:

  • Cancel the IC and boats currently under production. They have just begun so no significant work will be lost. The IC will be built more efficiently later and the boats will soon be obsolete This leaves us with 50 available IC which will be devote to buildings
  • Build Coastal Forts, expanded Naval Bases and airfields in the Pacific on Guam, Wake Island, Midway and Honolulu with the 50 IC: These will finish in 6 months. Then:
  • In July Improve the sub - par infrastructure along the Canadian border to enhance Pacific supplies
  • Use the remaining 45 IC in July to build 9 factories at a ~15% discount from our improve practical.
  • I propose that we devote the other 40 IC to our air force. Build a second Strategic Bomber squadron and once the artillery is finished split the rest between Interceptors and Multi - Role Fighters. We should be able to produce three of each.
  • Put 1 x 99 set of escorts last in the queue, our supply is dangerously low and this will soak up any additional IC.


Conclusion
This plan will modernize our naval and army designs and put us in a good position to construct these modern units next year. Meanwhile, it will increase our air force to respectable levels with modern craft and expand our industrial base. Best of all it will reallocate leadership wasted on the bloated state and incontinence departments to fund vital research. As always, I am open for any questions or suggestions.


-Sen. Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
 
Last edited:
Senator Thomas, I would support your bill if you instead of Cancelling our current IC and boat builds you moved them down the production list so that we won't lose the process we currently have on them.
 
Senator Thomas, I would support your bill if you instead of Cancelling our current IC and boat builds you moved them down the production list so that we won't lose the process we currently have on them.

Ah, I forgot to mention, there is no progress on these projects, they have just begun. I'll edit the bill to put that fact in. Are you fine with these cancellations now?
 
((Edit the name of the bill. My character's surname has an e on the end.))
 
"I'm glad to see the Senator believes he knows better than the US Military's Chiefs of Staff what the Military requires!"

~Admiral Standley
 
"I'm glad to see the Senator believes he knows better than the US Military's Chiefs of Staff what the Military requires!"

~Admiral Standley

I'm sorry to say Admiral, but I consulted General MacArthur about the military's needs before Senator Rudolf and I drafted the bill.

- Senator Elexis Sinclaire
 
((Edit the name of the bill. My character's surname has an e on the end.))

((oops, my bad, corrected))


"I'm glad to see the Senator believes he knows better than the US Military's Chiefs of Staff what the Military requires!"

~Admiral Standley


Admiral, I would welcome any constructive criticism or suggestions to our plan. As Senator Sinclaire said we try to work with the chiefs of staff.
 
Senator Rudolf, General MacArthur telegrammed me again. He wishes for some alterations to our bill before we present it for voting.

Senators Rudolf and Sinclaire,

Though I am generally pleased with your budget thus far, I have several issues which I need resolved before I can endorse it.

Industrial Policy: I'm sure that you have already considered this approach, but I would like to remind you that subsidizing factories to produce consumer goods would save us 24.48 IC and enable us to construct more bases in the Pacific - or my RRC (see below).

Intelligence Policy: Given the steady erosion of our nation's unity over the past year, it would be advisable to direct the FBI to increase our national unity by disrupting conspiracies - both foreign and domestic - against our democratic system of governance.

Research: I have no quarrel with the technologies you recommend - indeed, I plan to research them myself once we have sufficient resources; my main concern is that I was not consulted in this process. If you intend to publish such a detailed research schedule in future budgets (which I personally advise against, as , could you please consult with me and the other Chiefs of Staff beforehand? Doing so would help us better align our needs with your budgets, and would help you gain our endorsements (and thus, Congressional support) more easily.

Production: My main issue with your budget bill is that the second RRC that I requested is not mentioned in your budget, and I can only assume that you have no plans to produce it this year in light of your statement that "we should only produce airplanes and buildings" this year. While I am willing to delay the production of the second RRC's armored brigade until we have better designs available, I must insist that you permit me to build the infantry and artillery components of the RRC.

These 4 divisions - each consisting of 3 infantry brigades and an artillery regiment - would provide us with significant practical experience, greatly speeding our research. furthermore, if you subsidize industrial production of consumer goods (as I have recommended above), the IC necessary for the production of these brigades would be almost entirely offset by the cost savings from subsidizing consumer production (this would cost 24.71 IC over 280 days, producing 2 series of 2 divisions).

I ask that you carefully consider my requests - particularly my request for my second RRC - so that I can support the final draft of your bill in good conscience.

Sincerely,
General Douglas MacArthur,
Chief of Staff, United States Army

What do you say?

- Senator Elexis Sinclaire
 
General MacArthur,


Thank you for your feedback, with regard to the issues you have raised

Industrial Policy: Actually I was unaware of this approach, I'm afraid I'm not familiar with how we would go about subsidizing factories. However, if it produces a net gain in IC available for production it has my full support.

Intelligence Policy: Agreed

Production: If the subsidization of production does produce the net 25 IC gain I would be happy to devote it to your RRC. However, as mentioned both our Artillery and Armor need time to be modernized before we produce more. Would it not be wiser to spend this year planning better ways to construct these units while focusing on strengthening our modern air force? In conclusion, we could produce more infantry, but I would be opposed but persuadable to producing armor and artillery.


My apologies if I have offended the Chiefs with this budget, my intent was not to pass then by. I will be sure to keep this in mind in the future. As always, feel free to contact me with suggestions.


Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]
 
General MacArthur,


Thank you for your feedback, with regard to the issues you have raised

Industrial Policy: Actually I was unaware of this approach, I'm afraid I'm not familiar with how we would go about subsidizing factories. However, if it produces a net gain in IC available for production it has my full support.

Intelligence Policy: Agreed

Production: If the subsidization of production does produce the net 25 IC gain I would be happy to devote it to your RRC. However, as mentioned both our Artillery and Armor need time to be modernized before we produce more. Would it not be wiser to spend this year planning better ways to construct these units while focusing on strengthening our modern air force? In conclusion, we could produce more infantry, but I would be opposed but persuadable to producing armor and artillery.


My apologies if I have offended the Chiefs with this budget, my intent was not to pass then by. I will be sure to keep this in mind in the future. As always, feel free to contact me with suggestions.


Thomas Rudolf [R-OH]

Senator Rudolf,

I recognize your concerns about the inefficiency of producing obsolete artillery. That said, we ultimately plan to upgrade these artillery regiments to use self-propelled guns rather than traditional, stationary pieces; Army engineers have assured me that we can outfit these new regiments with the latest weaponry for no extra charge during the upgrade process. Our primary concern, besides obtaining the practical knowledge necessary for the development of these new artillery guns, is to ensure that we have a base of trained artillerymen ready for deployment when we do obtain these new weapons.

- General MacArthur

((The "subsidization of factories" is just my term for switching to Consumer Product Orientation under Industrial Policy. I'm honestly not sure how it logically frees up more IC - presumably, you become more efficient at making consumer products, and thus need fewer factories to make the same amount of goods - but that's why I'm the Army Minister and not the President. :laugh:))
 
Senator Rudolf,

I recognize your concerns about the inefficiency of producing obsolete artillery. That said, we ultimately plan to upgrade these artillery regiments to use self-propelled guns rather than traditional, stationary pieces; Army engineers have assured me that we can outfit these new regiments with the latest weaponry for no extra charge during the upgrade process. Our primary concern, besides obtaining the practical knowledge necessary for the development of these new artillery guns, is to ensure that we have a base of trained artillerymen ready for deployment when we do obtain these new weapons.

- General MacArthur

((The "subsidization of factories" is just my term for switching to Consumer Product Orientation under Industrial Policy. I'm honestly not sure how it logically frees up more IC - presumably, you become more efficient at making consumer products, and thus need fewer factories to make the same amount of goods - but that's why I'm the Army Minister and not the President. :laugh:))

After consultation, I agree that a Consumer Product Orientation would increase our available IC by ~25. As for the artillery, I'll trust in your expertise in this matter. The RRD and Consumer products focus will be added to the final version of the bill.


-Sen. Thomas Rudolf, [R-OH]


((doh! I've never even bothered looking at the policies! We should have done this last year!))
 
After consultation, I agree that a Consumer Product Orientation would increase our available IC by ~25. As for the artillery, I'll trust in your expertise in this matter. The RRD and Consumer products focus will be added to the final version of the bill.


-Sen. Thomas Rudolf, [R-OH]

Thank you, Senator Rudolf. When you release the final draft of the bill, I will be proud to endorse the Rudolf-Sinclaire Budget.

((doh! I've never even bothered looking at the policies! We should have done this last year!))

((Yeah, I know - I only caught it because I was looking at the IC totals and desperately scrounging for factories. :laugh:))
 
To the President and the members of the Senate Intelligence Committee:

My staff have been reporting disturbing whispers about foreign conspiracies. Might I recommend that our new chief of intelligence direct the FBI to investigate and neutralize the sources of this unrest, to help unify our nation?

- Gen. MacArthur

((Between random events and the "fractured government" penalty, our National Unity has taken a decent-sized hit this year. If we ever want Heavy Industry Emphasis, we probably need to switch our domestic spies to the Raise National Unity mission. Not my department, I know, but I haven't seen anyone else address the issue yet.))

General MacArthur --

I shall instruct Director Hoover to change our priorities. A fine idea.

President Roosevelt

((We've got the makings of a fine bill with Rudolf and Sinclaire; will no one challenge them?))