|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Apr 9, 2008 21:20:00 GMT -6
Just make it a budgetary item, is my feeling.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 10, 2008 3:45:57 GMT -6
I feel like I'm talking to crazy people - or maybe I'm not explaining my thoughts properly.
Do you, Brad, or you, Alex - quite apart from Brad's fear of Big Government - oppose the concept of Talossans banding together to give money to Tibet? (Apart from understandable fears that in a Pan-Talossan effort, Alex might accidentally offend a Republican and we'll have our money revoked, whilst being pointedly asked if we're REALLY friends of Tibet.)
Do either of you - or Xhorxh - oppose the idea of an "official" structure for providing this? If so, why? I know The Man is a pernicious thing etc etc, but when Yeshua Bar Josep asked us to give those in need the coat off our back, he didn't mean "in the form of warm sentiments on an internet forum". (No, we don't need to discuss his or Paul's alleged permissive attitude to slavery, AD =p)
If an official Talossan fund - similar to the space project fund, say - were set up, either in the form of a one-shot, or, as I'd prefer, a standing Bureau, we could feel like we are doing SOMETHING those who are crying for our help; if we are a nation, certainly we must act maturely and aid them to the best of our ability (even if there is no budgetary contribution for the time being); and if we are friends, to each other and to them, then acting communally is preferable; and as we are human, there is no higher calling then aiding the poor and oppressed.
Whenever this fund is set up, I will contribute 60USD straight off the bat.
|
|
Brad Holmes
Cunstaval to Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Atatürkey, and flying by the seat of my RUMP
Posts: 1,014
Talossan Since: 3-16-2006
|
Post by Brad Holmes on Apr 10, 2008 5:28:18 GMT -6
I feel like I'm talking to crazy people. Likewise. Not at all. Do whatever you want. Just don't spend our hard come by treasury funds when there are more important, NATIONAL needs (currency, stamps, etc). Similar reason to why ICE failed: Talossa, as a nation, is not ready to participate in international charity, politics, etc. That's not to say that individuals, or groups of Talossan citizens aren't ready or able to do so of their own volition. Yes. We already have a Ministry for foreign affairs. And a critic for foreign affairs. Set up all the voluntary contribution funds you want. And there's no need to even make it a one time thing. People can donate as much as they want, as often as they want. Whomever oversees the fund can make weekly, bi-weekly, tri-weekly, or monthly, etc. donations to the cause as he sees fit and/or the fund supports. I may not agree with the "no higher calling", but I do agree with the idea of charitable giving. That's why I do it. Knock yourself out and go nuts.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 10, 2008 5:44:08 GMT -6
Barry Goldwater would be proud.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Apr 10, 2008 7:53:43 GMT -6
Barry Goldwater would be proud. Hey, I own a well-worn copy of The Conscience of a Conservative.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 10, 2008 11:20:49 GMT -6
I hear you're immigrating to 1964, right?
The thing, I think it's disingenuous to dismiss the expenditure when it by no means need come from governmental sources; I think it's ignoring the facts to dismiss governmental involvement in any sense when governmental involvement would clearly help drive this and give it credibility, and when it simply takes one person to put in an hour a week to administer, advertise, and process donations etc.
I would suggest the real question is "How would we determine how such money should be spent?" (with perhaps a corollary "Should we make this a pan-Talossan effort?").
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Apr 10, 2008 11:32:22 GMT -6
I hear you're immigrating to 1964, right? Nah, 1964 wasn't ready for Barry. Instead, we got LBJ's War on Poverty, which completely eliminated U.S. poverty by the 1970s. I think they have a museum dedicated to it in the Republic of South Vietnam. Personally, I wouldn't have a big problem with creating a bureau (within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or otherwise) to administer a voluntary fundraising campaign for this purpose. The best argument I see for keeping the thing totally private is precisely the question you ask: how to determine how the money is spent. Which leads to the question of who determines how the money is spent. And if the money is contributed voluntarily by individuals, why shouldn't those individuals (perhaps collectively as some kind of foundation) decide how to spend the money? Why should those who do not contribute decide how to spend the money donated by those who do?
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 10, 2008 11:38:53 GMT -6
I hear some folk suggest Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty was pretty half-cocked, meaning any results cannot really be seen as the sum total of state intervention's value Of course, Richard Nixon's Vietnam strategy and upright party political conduct really set America on the right path, marvellously followed up by the unelected but nonetheless GREAT Gerald Ford. But you know who would have made a great President? Spiro Agnew.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Apr 10, 2008 11:40:46 GMT -6
Of course, Richard Nixon's Vietnam strategy and upright party political conduct really set America on the right path, marvellously followed up by the unelected but nonetheless GREAT Gerald Ford. Yep, that's what you get when you elect liberal Republicans.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 10, 2008 11:48:03 GMT -6
Man, Ron Paul really IS the people's choice!
I do think your concerns about procedure are valid - what might be the best way is announcing individual campaigns/targets - but under the aegis of the same team each time, as opposed to disparate, individual campaigns.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Apr 10, 2008 12:12:54 GMT -6
I am casually opposed to a new bureau, since I think the Finance Minister is pretty well capable of doing this, and if he is not, then he can create a new bureau under his own power. It is not a huge deal, but we don't need to mandate a bureau in law and thereby adamant it into existence. Let the government work as intended.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 10, 2008 12:14:58 GMT -6
Well if you mean to say "a humanitarian aid fund should be set up under the aegis of the Finance Minister" that might indeed be a sound starter for ten.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Apr 10, 2008 12:19:02 GMT -6
Sure. That would be fine with me. The amount can be set every term as part of the initial budget, then. It would utilize the current mechanisms set up and the proper workings of government, rather than legislating out amounts and offices. Then I think everyone is happy.
|
|
Xhorxh Asmour
Talossan since 02-21-2003
Wot? Me, worry?
Posts: 1,754
|
Post by Xhorxh Asmour on Apr 10, 2008 14:51:54 GMT -6
..... Do whatever you want. Just don't spend our hard come by treasury funds when there are more important, NATIONAL needs (currency, stamps, etc). ...... Talossa, as a nation, is not ready to participate in international charity, politics, etc. That's not to say that individuals, or groups of Talossan citizens aren't ready or able to do so of their own volition. Set up all the voluntary contribution funds you want. And there's no need to even make it a one time thing. People can donate as much as they want, as often as they want. Whomever oversees the fund can make weekly, bi-weekly, tri-weekly, or monthly, etc. donations to the cause as he sees fit and/or the fund supports. I make your words mine, Brad. Couldn't agree more. I don't think we should create an official Charity Bureau or Department, but anyone is free (and I wholeheartedly encourage them) to create a private charity group.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Apr 10, 2008 17:57:04 GMT -6
MC Edwards and I have reached a compromise on the matter which I think will serve everyone's interests when it comes to the financial thing, submitted separately to the Hopper. Perhaps, if the sponsors here find it acceptable, they will assent to removal of the redundant financing clause in this bill?
|
|