MA: Mideast Budget Amendment (Passed)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]
Sponsor: Tmthforu94

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This is 2% higher than the compromise requested by those on the left.  Is this more acceptable?

[Talleyrand]

I support this. Definitely something I can live with.

[tmthforu94]

This is 2% higher than the compromise requested by those on the left.  Is this more acceptable?

Probably not, but it's worth a shot.

[TJ in Oregon]

NO!!!! I DEMAND 115.5%!!! ONE-FIFTEEN-FIVE OR BUST!!!

[tmthforu94]

Actually, my preference was 111.11%. Or how about 123.456%?

[TJ in Oregon]

Actually, my preference was 111.11%. Or how about 123.456%?

111.11% would actually be pretty good for calculations because it's 10/9.

[ZuWo]

I will support this. While I'd prefer to set the percentage at 110%, I can also live with 115%.

In general, a budget amendment is a good idea because it actually requires our regional government to pass a budget, which makes governing much more interesting. In the current situation it is easy for a governor and the Assembly to refuse to pass a budget because they either don't care or are too lazy to do the necessary work. The question remains, though, what happens if we as a region adopt this amendment and a future government simply ignores it. What should be the consequences, if any?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This is 2% higher than the compromise requested by those on the left.  Is this more acceptable?

That's not true and you know it.  Hell, Tmth first mentioned that possibility in a PM only to reject it later (although he admittedly never committed, only put it out there).

[tmthforu94]

This is 2% higher than the compromise requested by those on the left.  Is this more acceptable?

That's not true and you know it.

Sorry, do you not like to consider yourself part of the "left"? Because this certainly indicates you supported it:

That is the most convincing argument I've heard on this.  I could live with 113%

Am I reading this wrong?

And I don't know what you mean by "Tmth rejected it". That suggestion was made AFTER the vote had already passed, so 110% had to be the one voted on. And since then, I introduced a version that was even higher than the number you proposed. So I certainly think I'm trying to work with both sides to get this done. I always thought of you as big on compromise, but this all seems awfully political to me.

[tmthforu94]

The question remains, though, what happens if we as a region adopt this amendment and a future government simply ignores it. What should be the consequences, if any?

That's a good question. I was thinking perhaps an Assembly shutdown, where the Assembly may not deliberate on any other legislation until a budget has been passed.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This is 2% higher than the compromise requested by those on the left.  Is this more acceptable?

That's not true and you know it.  Hell, Tmth first mentioned that possibility in a PM only to reject it later (although he admittedly never committed, only put it out there).

I only saw you post it.  How the hell was I supposed to know that he sent it in a PM?  You made some post about 113% was acceptable... I don't remember.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Fine... screw it... I don't care.  Let's just make it 120%.  Is that enough of a compromise now?

[Gass3268]

Fine... screw it... I don't care.  Let's just make it 120%.  Is that enough of a compromise now?

I could live with that

[tmthforu94]

For the hundredth time (a slight exaggeration, but it's certainly been quite a few) can someone from the left please explain to me why 110% is so much worse than 125% from an economic standpoint, once you consider clause three? On top of that, I'd be interested in hearing the same argument for 115% and 117%. I have yet to hear an actual argument for having a higher percentage. As I've said before, I would certainly be willing to negotiate with a number more if someone on the left would actually engage in a real debate on the economic difference between the two, but that has yet to happen.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

For the hundredth time (a slight exaggeration, but it's certainly been quite a few) can someone from the left please explain to me why 110% is so much worse than 125% from an economic standpoint, once you consider clause three? On top of that, I'd be interested in hearing the same argument for 115% and 117%. I have yet to hear an actual argument for having a higher percentage. As I've said before, I would certainly be willing to negotiate with a number more if someone on the left would actually engage in a real debate on the economic difference between the two, but that has yet to happen.

I'm with you.  I don't see what's wrong with 110%.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This is 2% higher than the compromise requested by those on the left.  Is this more acceptable?

That's not true and you know it.

Sorry, do you not like to consider yourself part of the "left"? Because this certainly indicates you supported it:

That is the most convincing argument I've heard on this.  I could live with 113%

Am I reading this wrong?

And I don't know what you mean by "Tmth rejected it". That suggestion was made AFTER the vote had already passed, so 110% had to be the one voted on. And since then, I introduced a version that was even higher than the number you proposed. So I certainly think I'm trying to work with both sides to get this done. I always thought of you as big on compromise, but this all seems awfully political to me.

You first proposed 113% via PM.  I already said that I should've made clear it was a one time offer.  I assumed since we had to vote on 110% that you had rejected it.   

[tmthforu94]

We voted on 110% because it had already passed. I never rejected 113%, obviously, since I'm now proposing 115%.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Well, somebody put up an amendment... I don't care who or what it is.  But if you don't like 110%, put it up now, or forever hold your peace.

[Talleyrand]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I propose this amendment.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I'll vote against raising the debt limit.  I only support changes to the percentage of the deficit.

[Talleyrand]

I withdraw the amendment; just trying to stir some discussion here. I don't care too much about the deficit cap, but the debt ceiling is fundamental to me, and I will not vote for any version without it.

[Gass3268]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I propose this amendment.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And you're willing to support it at that point, correct?

[Talleyrand]

If you don't change the debt ceiling, that amendment is adequate, though I must point out a 20% deficit is around $60 billion, more than $50 billion.