Economic Policy:> In 2018, 38 million Atlasians lived in poverty. How can this be addressed?
In the years prior to 2016, we made great progress in this regard. Unfortunately, the needed reset in 2016 pinned us to the current US RL economic and budgetary standards. In the years that followed, the Federalist Party controlled the White House for the vast majority of this time, making reforms along these lines impossible. Even with ideal leadership on this front, it’ll take years to get back to where we were.
Ultimately, I believe a combination of progressive taxation and targeted programs aimed at poor and working class people is the only solution to this problem. We have made great strides with the passage of the
Wealth Tax Act to ensure a reduction in income inequality, but before we can make any further commitments, we must get budgetary and legislative estimates from our GM department. I made a pledge to this country to reduce the deficits delivered to this country by the Federalist Party and get us on sound footing: once this is accomplished over the next month or so, our attention will turn to the crafting of policy aimed at returning our income inequality to its pre-reset levels.
> Technological changes are constantly reshaping the economy. How should policy be adapted to deal with these changes?
As I spoke about during the June presidential debate, technological changes are a huge component in our day-to-day lives. Ultimately, the dignity of work is being replaced with the cold reality of robots, machines, software and algorithms. We must take steps to prepare our people and economy for this inevitable situation.
As such, I pledged during the campaign to pass a major space exploration package that would lead the way for vital tasks such as permanent off-world colonies and resource extraction. We accomplished this task fortunately
via the SEDSA/SEDDA package, allocating $150 billion to the task of securing our future. In my view, this is the single biggest change made by any administration to safeguard our people against the changes that technology will bring.
In the coming years and decades, policy must reflect the fact that a decreasing percentage of the population will be able to find work, which ultimately will precipitate the need for a greater share of the economy to be allocated by public interests. Otherwise, a dystopian future awaits us all.
> What changes, if any, would you like to see to the tax code?
As elaborated on in the first question, I believe ultimately that taxes on the wealthy must be increased to reflect our pre-reset (2016) levels, with that revenue being focused predominantly on the poor and working class. Unfortunately, the GM department (the one aspect of the “cabinet” that I do not unilaterally have power to appoint or dismiss) has been silent in responding to multiple members of the administration, Congress and beyond, including fellow candidates in this race.
Until we can resolve the do-nothing situation in this area, it would be irresponsible of me to pledge specific policies without cost estimates. After all and as mentioned above, I have pledged to eliminate these wild deficits: a pledge I intend to honor. However, I will state that my general guiding principle in the short-term (post-budget) is that for every $1 we generate via the top earners, $0.50 should be allocated via tax cuts and/or credits to those earning less than $50k per year and $0.50 should be invested into programs that directly benefit these individuals.
> From PSOL: What is your opinion on the Federal Gas Tax Reform Act? Would you support its passage and do you see similar tiered sales taxes as being a good measure to appropriately tax individuals based on their parallel “felt” taxes?
I’m generally against regressive forms of taxation, which the proposed bill attempts to avoid. While I believe the brackets/taxes specifically may need to be adjusted to some degree, I’m amenable to the general proposal. My one concern is the level of bureaucracy and confusion that this law may create; I remain open-minded on this front and look forward to a discussion on the subject.
Social Issues:> From S019: What are your views on stricter gun control?
I stand with my hemisphere broadly speaking on the matter of gun control, but I was also raised in a rural area and understand the cultural and pragmatic importance of the issue. As such, any measures to address the broader issue I will approach with healthy skepticism and rationality.
The
Gun Control Act of 2017 invested this broader issue in the hands of the regions, two of which have taken action on to varying degrees. One of my opponents, AZ, passed the most stringent gun control measures in the post-reset version of the game as Governor – which is why it’s so shocking to me that he’s suddenly acting as if he’s all pro-gun. Nevertheless, my position on the matter remains the same as it’s always been. I voted in favor of Lincoln’s gun referendum in June after much deliberation and remain open to legislation that replaces the GCA of 2017 once Congress considers it.
> From S019: What are your views on abortion?
I am pro-choice, to put it simply. I believe there is room for discussion
in theory, but given where the Right and the Federalist Party is at presently, there is no room for debate in practice.
> What would be your administration's policies on immigration?
To stop the flow of undocumented migration, the root cause must be addressed. Rather than attacking those who come here to work and seek a better life, we must address all of our punitive efforts at businesses that hire unauthorized workers. I have made it clear in the last campaign that I will sign any measure that aims the penalties at corporations rather than hard-working individuals. No wall, border or security measures will address this issue adequately given our policies with regard to tourism, customs and international treaties pertaining to movement of people. People come here to work: if they cannot find work, they don’t come without authorization. It’s really that simple.
> How will your administration approach foreign policy?
Seeing as I am the only candidate who can discuss foreign policy from the perspective of being involved presently, it puts me in a unique position. However, given that the vast majority of foreign policy discussions have occurred via the National Security Council and are therefore classified, I am not at liberty to discuss the details of many. I can however say that we are communicating presently with entities regarding human rights reforms, attempting to ameliorate the damage caused by the massive Federalist War With China, and a treaty has just been introduced in Congress regarding free trade in Kenya, which was led by our current Secretary of State.
Ultimately, I describe myself as a libertarian regarding foreign policy in terms of intervention and aggression, and in my three terms as President, we have never had a military conflict. If re-elected, I intend to continue that trend and use the might of our country in highly-specific ways that don’t involve missiles, bombs and blow-torches.
Game/Reform Issues:> What is your view on how the relationship between regional and federal government should be?
My opinion has not changed from four months ago (though fortunately we have reduced the runaway trend of regional office proliferation since):
More or less how it does today. Pre-reset, the regional governments had more power and influence in some areas, and less in others. The Constitutional Convention shifted much of this (for example, it reduced the number of regional offices while increasing the number of federal offices, while also giving the Regions control of Senate elections rather than the federal government).
We didn't get everything right, but by and large, the balance is better today than it was 4 years ago. Obviously the federal government reserves the right through constitutional procedures to limit or otherwise reserve powers for itself that may not currently rest solely with it, but I see no major issue (barring the imbalance in the number of federal/regional offices) that is of immediate or dire concern.
> There have been many complaints about the lack of stories from the GM. What are your thoughts on this and the role of Game Engine more broadly?
The Game Engine is fundamentally broken at present: not because of the way it is designed, but because of who is managing it. Tmth tried to provide us with stories before his departure, but ultimately decided to leave. The reality is that the lack of stories from the GM is just the tip of the iceberg of the problem with this department at present (as referenced above).
Another issue that frankly inhibits story-telling more broadly is the lack of response from the citizenry. As somebody who held the office of Game Moderator twice, I can tell you that players almost only respond to story-lines when they have something to nit-pick about or complain. Getting people to act on stories told by the Game Engine is difficult and has always been so, and I’m not sure there’s any way to change the collective mindset of players regarding this. However, telling stories is a fundamental responsibility of the Game Engine and should be offered regardless of public engagement. Those who don’t feel up to the task should do what I did after I grew tired of people not responding to my stories: resign and let somebody else take over the role.
> What are your views on campaign finance reform?
Supportive. My belief is that a system that finances both primaries and general elections via public dollars is a sorely-needed concept in our society.
However, this is obviously one issue where even when factoring in real-life policy outcomes is hard to tangibly address in-game given the fact that none of us are actually raising money or getting paid.
Individual Questions:> To Adam Griffin: In your platform, you called for expanding the social safety net. Can you expand on this?
Once we have received estimates from the GM on this fiscal year’s budget and formally passed it, we’ll be in a better position to determine how best to proceed. Given how much I’ve already written, I’ll keep this focused on the biggest slice of meat: FICA.
My broader plan would be to completely eliminate the payroll tax cap (and increase Medicare contributions by 0.6%). With regard to SSI, we would first ensure that the program is funded based on the actuaries for a 75-year period (thereby eliminating any need to discuss “reform” to the program), with the remaining additional revenue being distributed to those collecting less than 50% of the maximum SSI monthly benefit.
