Security Council News October 2011 (Little Upsilon)

Fellow Presidents of LU,

A reminder note to enourage the supporting of giving financial aid to new players.

WORLD FIGURES:

Total number of countries:	3,467
Number of occupied countrie:	1,770
% of available countries:	51.05%
Number of empires:	1,313
Number of slave countries:	457
Average empire size:	1.35
% occupied that are slaves:	25.82%
Countries in federation:	477
Countries not in a federation:	1,293
% in federation:	26.95%
Total empires' production:	308,595,880,420,865	(308T)
Total empires' population:	39,852,263,307	(39.8B)

I'm not giving Financial Aid to any Country that is a slave, period. Those types of countries have been the only ones I've had to vote on lately. If a slave country is in debt, too damn bad..

J, does a few trillion for a new player really matter either way. We want them to take countries and develop economies, why would it even bother you?

As far as I'm aware most of the aid applicants if not all have been single country applicants.

I think J.Skullz has a valid point.

I propose there is a discussion about this issue to set the general synods policy. Of course each individual can vote how s/he sees fit, but as a body the security council and the world could benefit from a general guide line.

yea I don't think aid should be given if the player is taking c3's. It is costly early and can be achieved just by taking a little extra time to develop their main country, without needing SC aid. I will always vote no to aid for a slave state.

I'm pretty sure froobs can only have a maximum of 2 countries.

To me it's a non-issue... I'll vote for aid regardless of main or second country. If they get aid twice, so what. It can be a reward for playing instead of falling asleep and letting their account expire.
Maybe they'll even subscribe to keep expanding...and then they'll probably reach level 3 and can't get any more aid.

If someone is exploiting it with many aid requests then we can just stop putting in aid proposals for that player.

I vote yes for every aid request, without even looking at the country in question usually. I don't care how many countries they have or why they need it or how they will spend it. I can hiccup 3T and not even notice it. Give them the money and maybe they will stick around.

I didn't mean to come off like an A-Hole. Im just saying I'll vote to give aid to any country, except a slave country.

Without trying to negate your perspectives, but this aid is meant to be "aid" and who else better to aid than active players. We shouldnt provide aid to a slave that's just being raided, but if the country is going to be developed then it benefits us to help it get up to speed and participating in the world economy quickly. It demands more products and is a better investment opportunity. Slaves are better than C3s for business. I agree with Kitsune, this aid could help keep newbs playing. We should encourage that.

Not to beat the point, but if you're not in direct competition with the empire requesting aid, there shouldn't be a reason to deny it. (Again, unless it's being raided.) If you view the aid as an unfair advantage to a competitor, then yes, I can understand voting no. But if you're not, what's the real problem? How does not providing the aid better the player or the community? It may teach the player a harsh economic lesson after the fact, or he/she may just quit cause they realize too late what they should have been doing in the first place. These players, at least most of the ones I've proposed aid for, communicate with me regularly and ask questions, make changes and are getting CEO requests now. They're participating. I think the aid's worth it just for that.

Who is raiding anything? Any player who raids a slave country for 3T that country received in aid is obviously not very good at raiding.

Concerning the current SC proposal for Development Aid to the Republic of Sardegna:

I must commend everyone's efforts as of late. The SC of LU has been surprising successful in proposing and distributing Development Aid. But we must not lapse into practices that make other players view the aid as a "free give-away" or some other unfair or unworthy extra bonus.

While I have absolutely no issue supporting aid for satellite countries in an empire, the economic condition of the empire overall should be taken into account.

Athretvari and empire of Berlusconi maintain several business relations, so I benefit from his continued success. But this particular proposal doesn't fit the basic qualification of helping a country 'in need of assistance.'

Berlusconi's empire consists of 4 countries and 2 enterprises upon LU:

capital: Republic of Sicilia
cash: 2,111.35B SC$
profit: 58.81B SC$
debt: 0.00B SC$
CEO tax rate: 0%
state corp profit contribution rate: 15%

sat1: Republic of Corsica
cash: -474.76B SC$
profit: 4.12B SC$
debt: 0.00B SC$
CEO tax rate: 15%
state corp profit contribution rate: 50%

sat2: Republic of Melita
cash: -443.47B SC$
profit: 16.33B SC$
debt: 0.00B SC$
CEO tax rate: 15%
state corp profit contribution rate: 50%

sat3: Republic of Sardegna
cash: -387.39B SC$
profit: 10.44B
debt: 0.00B SC$
CEO tax rate: 15%
state corp profit contribution rate: 50%

ent1: Europa Ltd
cash: 7.11B SC$
debt: 7.52T SC$

ent2: Mediterranean Ltd
cash: -1.06T SC$
debt: 16.02T SC$

All four countries have exceptional education, health, and transportation infrastructure already in place.

Sardegna and Sicilia maintain financial security settings but each of the other two sats are several trillion negative in assets and materials, almost as if they've been raided, yet are several gameyears old. (More than enough time to fix naturally.)

All four republics suffer from severe worker shortages, and inadequate supplies to state corps.

While Berlusconi's empire clearly shows some signs of financial trouble, each country is healthy and has a positive profit.

He can implement some simple changes to quickly correct the problems, including:
1: Sicilia currently maintains enough cash to transfer funds to each sat to immediately cancel their negative cash.
2: Each country can raise its state corp profit contribution rate above 50%, increasing state revenues each game month.
3: Each country can alleviate worker shortages through production-reduction operations or closure of state corps, to better profitability of CEO corps, thus increasing tax revenues.

Athretvari, with great respect for Berlusconi, must regrettably vote no for this particular proposal and ask others to carefully assess the need of the countries in question before SC and general voting, and when applicable to provide advice before assistance.

Peace and Prosperity

My assessment:
1. Has not received aid in the past.
2. Is a relatively newer player.
3. Has expressed a desire to learn aspects of the game to make him a better player.
4. Wishes to remain an active player in the game.

Added bonus: Bravo to him for expanding his Empire on his own!

Aid request approved! The Nevrondona Empire will never vote against an aid request if the player meets the above listed requirements.

Okay, I can agree with that list.

Berlusconi is not in need as other new players and has demonstrated some success at growing which has left his empire a littrle shaken.

The aid is to keep the player active and given him more time in which to learn to correct those elements he's overlooking.

If he'd had aid in the past I wouild not have suggested it.

More than anything, we want to encourage able players to remain active in the game.

Goth, rather than your list of reasons why not to vote positively, I suggest those should be clebrated thats all that is needed for a new players to attempt to improve his economy.

SC has so much money to give away that it is not about those just in need but to help those who are more able to stay and continue to learn and seek advice.

This proposal is not about need but about strategic benefit to LU.

I understand your arguments and appreciate your positions. But more times than not this aid has been rejected by the general membership because it doesnt seem needed. I would like the general community to get the sense we are in fact looking to assist and not reward.

These countries seem to have had a bunch of assets moved out recently, they're in relatively good shape and can easily be assisted by his main. It's almost like they've been made to look in need when in fact they arent. That's my issue with this particular proposal alone.

I'll support any proposal that meets David's requirements and Zen's as long as it also meets mine of looking needed.

Just explaining my vote is all.

Agreed David. This is why I always vote yes. If a little aid can show a new player that help is out there and we want them to stay, then a few trillion is worth it. More players is always good.

OR... do you think we should be able to give out money through our own federations instead of giving it through the security council? as in like transfering money from your country then putting it into your federation? then give it out to your own members who need it? especially if they're new players, this will most certainly recruit a lot of people to join our federations as money often talks. What do you think of this David? a good idea or a bad idea?

If you think it's a good idea, you can you submit it on the vote poll if you want.

Now that is a great idea, James. I'd vote for that.

We effectively have the ability to shares resources amomgst federation members via Virtual Assets. I've already done so.

So have I, but you can't give money to the 'free members' thats the problem, as it's such as those that need the extra cash boosts for their countries and potentially become 'full members'.

Feds used to do this a long time ago. I fully intend on giving aid to new players who join with me as well. It helped me when I was new. This should not replace security council aid. Every new player should get it if they manage to find the security council. I think that will be my new standard. Pretty sure I have said in the past that I don't even look at the countries--I just vote yes.

I will continue to repeat: Any experienced player who quibbles over 3T-5T in aid, either is not experienced or does not understand the value of 3T in this game.

Zen.

Feds used to do this a long time ago. I fully intend on giving aid to new players who join with me as well. It helped me when I was new.
(Zens Quote)


Then we should have a vote on it and revive this again as i'm afraid it's going to replace security council aid, it's useless anyway.

But to make up for this, the security council should have a bigger role in world affairs on this game, maybe it could implement or repeal certain policies like upto how many corps each enterprise can have worldwide for example, currently depending on who's in the security council.

"the security council should have a bigger role in world affairs on this game, maybe it could implement or repeal certain policies like upto how many corps each enterprise can have worldwide for example"

This would be a terrible thing. The SC has been abused in the past and this would really be a bad way for it to be abused.

And we don't need a vote on Feds giving aid to their members. A fed can do this any time it wants. A player can do this anytime he or she wants. I felt so inclined, I could give the next person to respond 5T in aid just because I felt nice today.

What is going on ZentrinoRisen!!! Not to be the next person or anything like that. 5T could buy alot of ammo.
I've been wondering. What is the purpose of the SC anyway?
What, to give out aid. When two countries "Go to War", to decide which one can't use nukes. Am I missing anything? No, I think that is about it. Those are the only two topics I've had to vote on.
Both of which could be resolved in general voting anyway!
So, my question to everyone is, What is it the SC for?