10/1 Debate

Ladder to Top Response

Eliminating taxes and relying entirely on service fees is unrealistic. The UN does not make enough money on services.

Forcing cheaper shops will lead to less people wanting to make shops. Thus leading to less customer choice.

Less restrictive laws could lead to harmful behavior.

Careful Anarchist Response

We confer with Ladder to the Top

New Purpose Response

We confer with Ladder to the Top

Humanitarian Traders Response

Although Ladder's presentation of their goals seems tame they do this to lure people into a trap. If Ladder replaces the UN and companies as a supercorp, then they could raise prices to harm everybody. They might also sell out the very elites they used to get power.

New Purpose Response

We confer with Humanitarian Traders

Careful Anarchist Response

Ladder wants to create a gov that polices people who are just trying to play the game.

They also want to monopolize and gatekeep the economy so nobody can use it unless they bow blindly to Ladder.

Humanitarian Traders Response

Ending banks/loans/bonds removes tools that help people save and invest; without them the economy will shrink and jobs will disappear.

Repealing national integrity would result in the UN being able to be used to corruptly help one nation.

New Purpose Response

I confer with Humanitarian Traders.

Additionally...

The anti exploitation law has already been made more specific.

A Economic Council of the 5 richest players could lead to a inactive council or a council that isn't really interested in making UN Jobs/Services because that doesn't make them money.

Ladder to the Top Response

Careful Anarchists claim to be careful yet their plan combines the worst of two worlds.

They want a unstable mess where people can harm other people without consequence.

They also want to cut all investments to destroy the economy and limit customer choice.

This isn't freedom that they're providing. It's people being annoyed constantly and closed buisness signs everywhere.

Humanitarian Traders Response

With all due respect, Gluon's plan seems corrupt because Vicar Solutions is her own company and that's the company she wants the UN to focus on investing in.

Furthermore making sure anybody besides Dark wins isn't a long term strategy for having a better democracy but rather a short term stop gap measure.

New Purpose Response

Gluon's plan is corrupt in that it helps her own company and leaves commoners dependent on Gluon's policies and Gluon's company.

Streamlining the existing loan investments isn't good because it continues the highly risky loan program when the UN (a already profitable entity) should be trying to slow down and consolidate rather than racing towards a cliff of unpaid loans. As for player choice, loans don't provide more choice for most since everybody has to get their loans approved and it's easier to do that if you're in government like Gluon is.

Ladder to the Top Response

Expanding the service economy is a relatively vague policy which Gluon intentionally doesn't make specific.

Gluon does this to hide the fact that she wants to expand the service economy by growing her unearned old elite run company and UN services. However Gluon's already created tons of UN services so we doubt she can just churn out a bunch more and continue to keep them high quality/useful/novel.