«12. . .2,0032,0042,0052,0062,0072,0082,009. . .2,5832,584»
I believe that the need for a market economy has been heightened by the wave of consumerism that has been active and ever increasing in the face of the technology which is now more accessible to the people. This trend is going to keep increasing, and with the rise in right wing politics, which is also likely to increase in the future, as a result of the combined forces of the terrorism-counter terrorism argument, and the increased accessibility to arms, leading to localization of the nations in the background of the universalization of trade.
In such a context, it would be hard to imagine human sanity without the very comforting arms of consumerism, and that is only possible with the expansion of Market Economy. Hence, I don't think we're losing Market Economy anytime soon.
Just cut my political apathy from 50 to 20 in two minutes...
Can someone please explain the endorsement thing, I'm quite confused about that.
Hello everyone, any helpon how to improve econemy and civil rights?
So endorsements are the games took of picking the WA Delegate. In our region, I am currently the elected delegate, so I am supposed to get a majority of endorsements (I currently sit at 52% with 63 endorsements). If/when someone else is elected in my place, people will be asked to unendorse me and instead endorse the new President so they may attain Delegate status.
Taking a look at your nation, I would firstly look at civil rights as the most extreme form of 'can I do this' in NS. If its allowed, CR and/or PF goes up. If you can't for any reason, some group will be like 'but muh rights' and CR and/or PF does down. So that would mean, say, cameras in public. Whereas I dont see it as a breach of my rights, NS does. Stuff like that. Any type of restriction, big or small, will be seen by NS as a bad thing. Especially for me as I have played, civil rights does not approve of safety, and I struggled with a major crime issue as I tried to improve my civil rights. If you're focused on CR/PF improvement, always go for the choice that allows freedoms rather than any type of restriction.
As for economy, I've found bringing in small-scale capitalism and allowing for economic freedom allowed my economy to go from pretty much 0 to 100 in about 2 weeks. And there is also Koigardia's guide on getting from Imploded to Frightening and having it stick there greatly helped me.
Hope this helped!
Thanks man!, in the past i have tried sprinkeling in a bit of capitalism but i end up becoming a capitalist dictatorship half the time
It takes some time, but the issue 'Economic Collapse Looms' is a good start at some small scale capitalism.
There it is! Thanks for putting that link in, Novaya Rossiya. (cant seem to @ you...)
thx man
i just joined and i already feel like my citezens hate me
I just joined and made one environmental boo boo and now its a horrible wasteland.
Ouch, that's pretty bad. Oh well, make your mistakes now before moving on to a new nation. There really ought to be some sort of tutorial during the nation creation process...
My environment is horrible and good environment and good economy are not looking like they go hand in hand what should i do
I decided to strengthen my overall economy and then getting around to banning mining later. My best tip is to invest in science based decisions, they normally benefit both.
On another note: ALL WA members, I urge you to vote against the current proposal at vote, which works to threaten national sovereignty as well as further make WA nations accountable to the right-leaning WA
I achieved a frightening economy almost purely through socialism. I experimented with small scale capitalism for a little while to see if it would be a boon to the economy, and it was, but I didn't like what it did to my other stats (it caused a massive unemployment problem, for one) so I reversed it the next chance I got (and caused my economy to crash from good to fragile, but I don't regret it)
Actually, the resolutions concerning international accountability are the sort I'm open to. Reading through, it appeared agreeable. And then I got to this part: "Permits the Compliance Commission, in specific* investigations, to accept information and data which are presented by non-member nations and nations not party to that investigation; allows the Compliance Commission to request the assistance of nearby nations to more accurately assess and access the facts of the matter under investigation;" Upon which I did a 180 and switched my reception to OH HELL NO. For all the guff the WA good ol' boys club gives regarding non-member nations, now they turn around and give those who aren't bound by international laws and don't have to answer to anyone power over those that do? How will they prevent malicious testimony and fudged analyses from bordering hostile nations they have little knowledge of? What a bunch of goddamn hypocrites. If they're going to preach the separation of international body and state, they bloody well should practice it.
*this doesn't actually mean/do anything in terms of limiting the scope of investigations
Bananaistan, Ivory rhodes, Solus unus, Ordennya, and 1 otherMythylandia
I don't get what we can do, though. The vote stands at 5:1 in favour. I am working on a forum post to add to the debate, and I may begin drafting a repeal bill.
Their points are certainly valid, and it is a noble effort. 
Ratateague captured my sentiment exactly here:
Could the "non member" indicate non-members of the Commission, by any chance? I mean, if non-member participation is such a big deal, somebody would have objected and filed a repeal by now.
Non-member nations always means non-WA nations, unless it is somehow defined as a term within the resolution.
Basiliania and Ordennya
Hi everybody! I just joined your region!
«12. . .2,0032,0042,0052,0062,0072,0082,009. . .2,5832,584»
Advertisement
