CABINET VETO: "Forbidding the assimilation of foreign workers"

[Arnelos]

CABINET VETO #1: Of the Senate Bill Entitled "Senate Bill: Forbidding the assimilation of foreign workers"

CABINET VOTE:

President Arnelos: Yes
Vice President panag: Yes
FAM ManicStarSeed: Yes
DM Spiffor: Yes
SMC E_T: No

By 4-1, this Veto passes. As such, the Senate Bill is hereby vetoed by vote of the cabinet.

Reasons For the Veto of this Bill:

- All improvements within the nation should be complete within the next few turns. We have a large excess of workers compared to the needs of improving conquered German lands and cleaning pollution. As such, since we do not NEED as many workers and the population gained from joining these workers to our cities would beneficial, a large number should be joined (on this issue there is little disagreement).

- It would be more efficient to have a small number of natives do the remaining jobs for workers than a larger number of foreigners because we only serve to deprive ourselves extra population by using the foreigners as workers. The argument that the finances matter is hollow because we currently are at 100% science and our income is STILL over 180 LPT. When ToE and Hoover are completed and we techwhore the next batch of techs to replace the current payments, our income is likely to only further rise. The miniscule expense for having necessary small worker force will be minor in comparison to the income we would deprive ourselves by not joining our massive number of foreign workers to our cities.

- This bill would provide too stringent of a restriction on the Domestic Minister concerning the joining of workers to our cities. The Domestic Minister has expressed that he believes giving him more leeway in when and where to join natives and foreigners (both) might be necessary and that this bill and its opposite might both be unadvisable from the standpoint of pragmatic national interest.

- The bill passed 18-17-5, so it is clearly does not have consensus support in the Senate. It can also clearly be seen from the voting thread that some who voted in favor reconsidered their vote after their votes had already been cast. Given that the Senate is so greatly divided and the Cabinet feels this bill is detrimental to the national interest, we feel this is an appropriate use of the Cabinet's veto power.

-----------------------------------
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

ManicStarSeed: "I veto this because it HAMSTRINGS us. Making it an administrative policy is one thing. Making it law is another."

E_T has a dissenting opinion he will provide on his own in this thread. His main reason for concern was that he felt that the Domestic Minister had not presented a plan on the integration of the worker force into our cities with sufficient attention to the details.

[Aro]

I don't know if I can post here, but...
Even in a game I feel a little bad using slaves. Thanks to the cabinet for the veto.

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by Aro
I don't know if I can post here, but...

I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear before. EVERYONE IS WELCOME TO POST THEIR OPINIONS IN THIS THREAD. We remain a democracy.

Even in a game I feel a little bad using slaves. Thanks to the cabinet for the veto.

You're welcome.

[Kloreep]

Good veto. Once hospitals start to come on-line, we'll need the slaves for our cities. I'm glad we don't have to go through a counter-bill.

[Epistax]

at first I thought this was about the trout slapping

[E_T]

quoted from my Veto Vote Reasons
Re: CABINET VETO: PLEASE VOTE

In my own personal games, I like to keep a fair number of both Native & Foreign workers as back up to quickly (i.e. 1 turn) clean up any pollution that might arise. I also look at having to tweek the newly assimilated territories, as I don't like the "checkerboard" that the AI sets up for several Cities. I do send mostly my Native workers back before I start to assimilate any of the foreign contigent, as that helps to bring down my overhead.

As with several things, I have learned many things from playing the Demo Game. One is to add the workers right after the City has grown to size 13, to get the most effect from each cities size increase, while the city has to wait for the Granary to refill, before it increases through natural means.

With that all said, I would support the DM integrating the workers under the following conditions:

1) he makes either a policy statement (or an Executive Order)about exactly how many of each type of worker, he plans to keep for the above things.

2) his exact plans for the reintegration. This will address several issues with happiness and whether we are at war at the time or not.

As I have seen several postings about him (the DM) wanting to reintegrate, but I haven't seen anything as to how, when & where, I can not see with going with this plan right now.

My Veto Vote is NO.

As the DM has the power to post a New Senate Bill, I think that he should (especially in light of the peoples changes in viewpoints). What he requires, is to make the people look at it from his full point of view & present a concrete plan for the implementation of it. He needs to set & Implement the proper policies that will have more than a simple majority of the population, behind him in that policy/plan.

E_T

So, I was the only dissenting vote. As I stated above, I would like to see a plan, by the DM, to the Nation & the RA's as to how he plans to go and Implement this.

Does he plan to add to everywhere, evenly?

How many and of what type of Workers is he planning to keep? Will this take into account any that might be attained through war?

Does he plan to Add them evenly to all cities, or just the ones that get the Hospitals online first?

What does he plan to to do about the issue of Happieness, especially while we are at war & suffering form War Weriness?

These are the things that I would like to see from the DM. I would have presented (to the Senate) these kind of things, if I was still in that Office. I would like to see something from him along this line.

E_T

[Panag]

hi ,

we should let them join there where they are usefull , places that have food , places that are slow growers , places that can use an entertainer or so , ........

places with a hospital would be nice , but we could also let them join in smaller places and the new citizens could help to produce a hospital there , by the time the construction is finished they shall have joined our nation , .....

, we should take a look at each city

have a nice day

[DAVOUT]

Although not an unconditionnal supporter of the veto right, I find that we have here an appropriate use of it.

[Shiber]

I've been convinced lately that the arguments presented by the opposing group are correct and I have switched sides to those who support the integration of slaves first. As such, I am glad that this veto passed.
Here's a point proving that joining slaves is more efficient than joining workers that I haven't heard yet: in the worst case, where two slaves that join a city become taxmen because there are no tiles left to work, they will produce two gold per turn while the domestic worker still outside will cost us one gold per turn (a net income of one gold), whereas if we join the domestic worker he'll make one gold per turn serving as a taxman, while the two slaves outside will cost us nothing (a net income of one gold and the same amount of work done). We see that in the worst case scenario, the advantage to joining slaves is equal to the advantage of joining domestic workers. However, in most cases workers that will join cities will have tiles to work, and they'll make more than one gold per turn (in addition to shields and food), and therefore it's economical to join slaves into cities rather than joining workers.

[WhiteBandit]

Wow, is it too late to take my vote back for whom I voted for in this administration? I really disagree with this and think we are not really thinking this through. The economic benefits of these foreign workers (who are unfairly labeled as slaves in my opinion) still seem fairly unclear in my opinion.

It especially suprises me that the DIA, our so called "builders," do not see how great this free labor contributes to building our nation.

[RP!]I say this not only as a citizen and member of the senate, I say this as someone who worked with these workers along the front lines for two full terms.[/RP!]



What I posted in another thread follows:
----------------------
The only reason these foreign workers can be considered slaves is because they are "forced" to work for us and have no other choice. In the EXACT same way, our own workers who came from the cities and fields of our nation are slaves as well then. Should they not be freed as well? If not, now you are placing the value of a foreign citizen over the value of one of our own citizens.

Also, on the hypocrisy front (role playing or not), we fully support granting freedom to our "slaves" yet no one has uttered any sort of dissent that our SMC just killed thousands of innocent german civilians in a city for no good reason? I am not understanding this.

It's not okay to "enslave" our past/present enemies innocent civilian populace, but it is perfectly okay to burn them alive instead?

Perhaps these abolitionist organizations should look at a bigger picture before claiming they are morally and ethically righteous.

[Panag]

Originally posted by WhiteBandit
Wow, is it too late to take my vote back for whom I voted for in this administration? I really disagree with this and think we are not really thinking this through. The economic benefits of these foreign workers (who are unfairly labeled as slaves in my opinion) far outways any real life "ethical" mission some of you feel we should do. It especially suprises me that the DIA, our so called "builders" do not see how great this free labor contributes to building our nation.



What I posted in another thread follows:
----------------------
The only reason these foreign workers can be considered slaves is because they are "forced" to work for us and have no other choice. In the EXACT same way, our own workers who came from the cities and fields of our nation are slaves as well then. Should they not be freed as well? If not, now you are placing the value of a foreign citizen over the value of one of our own citizens.

Also, on the hypocrisy front (role playing or not), we fully support granting freedom to our "slaves" yet no one has uttered any sort of dissent that our SMC just killed thousands of innocent german civilians in a city for no good reason? I am not understanding this.

It's not okay to "enslave" our past/present enemies innocent civilian populace, but it is perfectly okay to burn them alive instead?

Perhaps these abolitionist organizations should look at a bigger picture before claiming they are morally and ethically righteous.

hi ,

its because we see the benefits and the speed that we shall be able to build with that we let them join in the first place , .....

we do it because we our nation to grow stronger and bigger then ever before , ......

have a nice day

[WhiteBandit]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

its because we see the benefits and the speed that we shall be able to build with that we let them join in the first place , .....

we do it because we our nation to grow stronger and bigger then ever before , ......

have a nice day

The benefit of speed at this point in time is really a moot point. We've nearly completed every single aspect of public works. This is why we are even considering of getting rid of workers in the first place. 6 foreign workers will do the same amount of work in the same time as 3 citizens. The fact that the 6 foreign workers are free greatly help. We can litterally keep an infinite number of these guys around and it will not cost us ONE SINGLE LYTON. And depending on how many we even have, they can do more work than all our own workers.

However this is a weak argument in the fact that there is really "nothing" to do in the scheme of public works. Would it not be smarter to keep around 6 workers who may potentially be sitting around waiting for work and costing us nothing, or waisting away 3 LPT waiting for our 3 workers to do something.

There really isn't a large enough econimic incenitive to this nor a speed benefit.

[Panag]

Originally posted by WhiteBandit


The benefit of speed at this point in time is really a moot point. We've nearly completed every single aspect of public works. This is why we are even considering of getting rid of workers in the first place. 6 foreign workers will do the same amount of work in the same time as 3 citizens. The fact that the 6 foreign workers are free greatly help. We can litterally keep an infinite number of these guys around and it will not cost us ONE SINGLE LYTON. And depending on how many we even have, they can do more work than all our own workers.

However this is a weak argument in the fact that there is really "nothing" to do in the scheme of public works. Would it not be smarter to keep around 6 workers who may potentially be sitting around waiting for work and costing us nothing, or waisting away 3 LPT waiting for our 3 workers to do something.

There really isn't a large enough econimic incenitive to this nor a speed benefit.

hi ,

just one Q , are you going to move each one of those workers , ........
and if you would read above you would see Shibers view , but imagine this , each worker that joins a city is a tile that is worked , a tile with food , shields and money , ....
and the city they join shall get more science , ......
a,d on top those workers shall join our civilization and when needed we can still re-activate them , either with keeping the original status or as workers from our civ , ....

and since we have some brains in the government , we are not going to let the remaining workforce sit and do nothing , and even if we would let the sit down for a minute or two , its shall be better then to have no workers at all when polution hits us , .... polution shall be cleaned up faster with a native force then with a foreign force , and it shall be a lot of moves that we can invest in other things , thus therefore speeding up the game (!)

in the end its only a win situation for us , so why leave such an oppurtunity go to waste , .....

have a nice day

[WhiteBandit]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

just one Q , are you going to move each one of those workers , ........
and if you would read above you would see Shibers view , but imagine this , each worker that joins a city is a tile that is worked , a tile with food , shields and money , ....
and the city they join shall get more science , ......
a,d on top those workers shall join our civilization and when needed we can still re-activate them , either with keeping the original status or as workers from our civ , ....

in the end its only a win situation for us , so why leave such an oppurtunity go to waste , .....

have a nice day

I did read Shiber's post and in fact I will quote here for reference:

I've been convinced lately that the arguments presented by the opposing group are correct and I have switched sides to those who support the integration of slaves first. As such, I am glad that this veto passed.
Here's a point proving that joining slaves is more efficient than joining workers that I haven't heard yet: in the worst case, where two slaves that join a city become taxmen because there are no tiles left to work, they will produce two gold per turn while the domestic worker still outside will cost us one gold per turn (a net income of one gold), whereas if we join the domestic worker he'll make one gold per turn serving as a taxman, while the two slaves outside will cost us nothing (a net income of one gold and the same amount of work done). We see that in the worst case scenario, the advantage to joining slaves is equal to the advantage of joining domestic workers. However, in most cases workers that will join cities will have tiles to work, and they'll make more than one gold per turn (in addition to shields and food), and therefore it's economical to join slaves into cities rather than joining workers.
Infasis is mine - WHITEBANDIT

Shiber is thinking of the worst possible scenario where all tiles are currently occupied. However this scenario can be renamed the "Long Term View." Because the longer we leave the FREE labor out there and instead intigrate our domestic workers into the cities, the cities will actually be making more money for us especially since the labor does not have to be supported.

I do think the last part of Shiber's post is flawed however. In most cases, yes a worker will probably have a tile they will need to work. In this case, the productivity of the worker (whether a foreign worker or a domestic worker) is EXACTLY the same in the city. So in the long run, if we integrate all our domestic workers into the cities first, we not only acheive exactly the same productivity in our cities, we actually GAIN money because we aren't supporting any workers, Instead they are MAKING us money plus we will still have a large labor pool.

[E_T]

WB, I can't post a Bill to override this Veto (because it isn't under my perview), but you (or some other Senator) can.

I'm not suggesting that anyone should, atleast not Until the DM has had a little time to come up with a plan.

I await Spiffor's Implemetation Plan.

E_T