National Debts

The place to discuss issues being debated in the 2009-2010 school year -- briefs, legislation and debate.

Moderator: Officers

User avatar
Jfanders
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:18 pm
Location: In your house

Re: National Debts

Postby Jfanders » Thu May 06, 2010 6:08 pm

Look, Eric, I love what you did with the resolution. It is now a lot a better and with a few minor adjustments, it could work. Look, still my only problem is with sectons 2 and three of this resoulution.
EWang wrote:2. Encourages the creation of an organization under the United Nations called the Discretionary Spending Evaluation Committee (DSEC) that:
1. Can suggest to each nation associated with the United Nations on the first three most important areas(decided by the organization) of discretionary spending that should be cut back on by 2015 so that:
• Nations can effectively reduce spending;
•Reduce their dependency on foreign nations for funding;

2. Additional three areas of discretionary spending that should be limited on per nation will be suggested by the DSE every three years afterwards if deemed necessary;

3. Suggests that nations cut expenditures in the areas mentioned by the DSEC;


Jesus (Or Moses, Abraham, Muhamaid, or any of those other guys), what the heck did I say to you guys before. If your going to do a section like this, give the job to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Come on man, don't give a job like this to an organization that doesn't have a basic feel for the international economic market as this does involove. One of the IMF's jobs is to sucure fincal and economic stability in an international econonomy. The IMF also already offers fincal and econmoic advice to contries in certain areas like this one as well. I think that instead of wasting money to do a job thats already in the process of being worked on, ask the IMF to help out and ask if they would accept these goals.

User avatar
athakker
I Have No Life
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 8:30 pm
Location: It's Classified.

Re: National Debts

Postby athakker » Thu May 06, 2010 6:24 pm

While editing the resolution, I added/expanded upon that section in because it is incredibly important to create an organization. The IMF is not so far reaching as this new committee. One must apply to be a member and after consideration, they are either elected or not elected. Venezuela, for example, was denied entry into the IMF and this is very unfair. The DSEC helps all countries and does not require any qualifications to join.

SRaghavan
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: National Debts

Postby SRaghavan » Thu May 06, 2010 9:13 pm

The revised version of 6-1 is definitely much more solid than than the initial one. I do have a few concerns, though:

The major concern is the DSEC, which seems to be unnecessary. Canada questions the necessity of having a separate sub-comittee solely devoted to spending more efficiently; Canada feels that this could be acheived without creating a separate committee, which would simply be redundant. Although a sub-committee is mentioned in Resolution 6-2, it serves to reduce off-shore funds, etc., which is a more meaningful reason for having a sub-committee.

Also, the resolution, 6-1, provides good ways to cut spending, but it doesn't mention too many options to reduce the National debt ALREADY existing. Resolution 6-2 will soon have an added section dealing with already existing debts.

User avatar
Jfanders
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:18 pm
Location: In your house

Re: National Debts

Postby Jfanders » Thu May 06, 2010 10:31 pm

Austria: How far do you really think this new organization should be reaching? Besides that, there could also be amendments and sections the emphisis or demand that countiries that apply be let into the IMF. However, the IMF also plays a part in this and what your new organization would do would just be a basic replica of one of the things this organization is alreay doing. Plus, you also have to take into account that this new organizations work may interfer with that of the IMF, which will cause problems for both parties. I would also like to know what is going to happen to this organization once the task it set out to do is complete. The IMF, the World Bank, these organizations will always have a purpose, your new organization won't have one once the situation is under control. Now, if you really must have this, have them work jointly with the IMF on this matter, for they have a lot more expirence on dealing with these countries than that of a newly formed organization. Not only that, but the IMF keeps data and statisics on the international economy including debt, so they will know more about where the harddest hit places are. This however only is if you must have this new organization. I still stand by this idea though and agian get what this section is trying to do. One more thing I would just like to ask, could you please supply the artical and the site or the other source where you recived this information about Venisala from?

Canada: That right, your not walking away from this unscaved etheir.
SRaghavan wrote:Canada questions the necessity of having a separate sub-comittee solely devoted to spending more efficiently
Dude, your commitee's are bassically in the long run going to do the same thing as the other one will. Second off, your bashing your own resolution basically, which also includes the creation of a sub-commitee on this matter. Why do we need a sub-commitee over off-shore funds? Are we really going to have an argument about this? Just be honest with me and I reiterate, why do we need a sub-commitee souly dovoted to off-shore funds?

User avatar
VSharma
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:08 pm

Re: National Debts

Postby VSharma » Sat May 08, 2010 9:45 am

I would like to explain the DSE to whoever may be questioning it. I created it due to the fact that governments will be biased towards keeping certain areas of discretionary spending that may not necessarily be needed For example, the United States is a strong military regime. For years now, it has expanded on its military spending. It is currently spending about $533.8 billion on the Department on Defense. During a state of recession, like the one in our present world, it may need to cut back on it. However, since defense spening is highly integrated within the United States as a whole, the United States may be reluctant to cut back on it. Now, we need a third party to deem whether it is actually necessary to have cuts within that specific area for the United States. This is the purpose of the Discretionary Spending Evaluation and it is an efficient system.
Last edited by VSharma on Sat May 08, 2010 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
VSharma
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:08 pm

Re: National Debts

Postby VSharma » Sat May 08, 2010 10:01 am

"Jesus (Or Moses, Abraham, Muhamaid, or any of those other guys), what the heck did I say to you guys before. If your going to do a section like this, give the job to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Come on man, don't give a job like this to an organization that doesn't have a basic feel for the international economic market as this does involove. One of the IMF's jobs is to sucure fincal and economic stability in an international econonomy. The IMF also already offers fincal and econmoic advice to contries in certain areas like this one as well. I think that instead of wasting money to do a job thats already in the process of being worked on, ask the IMF to help out and ask if they would accept these goals."
- Quoted by the almighty delegate Fanders

I would like to address delgate Fander's statement by stating that the primary purpose of the International Monetary Fund is not to secure economic stability of a nation, it is to manage the exchange rate system to make sure the value of a nation's currency does not fall to low. The IMF mostly focuses on giving loans to poorer nationas (which the nations cannot usually pay back). Also, the DSE will be managed under the United Nations. Therefore, the United Nations can make sure that it does its job correctly.

User avatar
galukal
I Have No Life
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 1:51 pm
Location: Located.

Speakers

Postby galukal » Sun May 09, 2010 3:13 pm

6-1
Pro: Turkey
Con:

6-2
Pro: Canada
Con:

I guess I'll draft people tomorrow, unless someone signs on by then. By the way, the school is now blocking this site, so print stuff beforehand!

SRaghavan
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: National Debts

Postby SRaghavan » Mon May 10, 2010 2:47 pm

I will be Pro for our resolution, George.

User avatar
VSharma
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:08 pm

Re: National Debts

Postby VSharma » Tue May 11, 2010 6:56 pm

If nobody else wants to, I will be pro for our resolution (6-1).

User avatar
galukal
I Have No Life
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 1:51 pm
Location: Located.

Re: National Debts

Postby galukal » Tue May 11, 2010 8:37 pm

Some revisions that Shree asked me to put up. If we go ahead with the old version because a lot of people printed it already, I'll try to a***d them in.
---------
Resolution 6-2

Sponsors: Canada, The United Kingdom, The Republic of France, Japan, Honduras.

Signatories: Turkey, Austria, The United States of America, China.

Alarmed that national debts throughout the world are huge and continuing to increase annually;

Aware that current regulations on national credit lending are inadequate;

Understanding that national debts will continue to hinder countries economically and socially;

Cognizant that plans to lessen national debts will be long-term and progressive;


Be it Hereby Resolved by the United Nations assembled:

1. Encourages more efficient spending in countries to reduce expenditures by:

a. Spending more efficiently on infrastructure within the nations.
b. Reducing the amount of money spent on unnecessary weaponry
c. Increasing public awareness about the need for fiscal responsibility;

2. Recommends the creation of a Commission of Debt Management under the United Nations Economic and Social Council
3. Condemns the use of tax havens and encourages nations to cooperate in:
a. Reducing offshore savings;
b. Increasing taxes marginally, especially for the wealthy, in order to generate more funds to pay off the national debt;

4. Instructs governments to exercise sound judgment in lending to foreign nations and cutting expenditures in appropriate areas;

5. Requests that creditor nations refrain from taking excessive action to recover a loan that may destabilize international markets;

6. Recommends that future plans to bail out nations through international bodies be contingent upon the creation of austerity plans and debt reduction plans.

SRaghavan
Pillar of the Community
Pillar of the Community
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: National Debts

Postby SRaghavan » Tue May 11, 2010 9:22 pm

Thank you George, I have just made a few more additions to the resolution.

Resolution 6-2
Sponsors: Canada, The United Kingdom, The Republic of France, Japan, Honduras.

Signatories: Turkey, Austria, The United States of America, China, Russia.

Alarmed that national debts throughout the world are huge and continuing to increase annually;

Aware that current regulations on national credit lending are inadequate;

Understanding that national debts will continue to hinder countries economically and socially;

Cognizant that plans to lessen national debts will be long-term and progressive;


Be it Hereby Resolved by the United Nations assembled:

1. Encourages more efficient spending in countries to reduce expenditures by:

a. Spending more efficiently on infrastructure within the nations;
b. Reducing the amount of money spent on unnecessary weaponry;
c. Increasing public awareness about the need for fiscal responsibility.

2. Recommends the creation of a Commission of Debt Management under the United Nations Economic and Social Council

3. Condemns the use of tax havens and encourages nations to cooperate in:
a. Reducing offshore savings;
b. Increasing taxes marginally, especially for the wealthy, in order to generate more funds to pay off the national debt;

4. Instructs governments to exercise sound judgment in lending to foreign nations and cutting expenditures in appropriate areas;

5. Requests that creditor nations refrain from taking excessive action to recover a loan that may destabilize international markets;

6. Recommends that future plans to bail out nations through international bodies be contingent upon the creation of austerity plans and debt reduction plans;

7. Mandates the increased use of condition-based legislations, which require that legislation that calls for increased spending must be offset by a raise in taxes or a spending cut in the budget in order to prevent the national debt from further swelling;

8. Encourages increased public awareness about the national debt and monitor fiscal fraud and corruption in the nation through mechanisms such as, but not limited to:
a. The Government Accountability Office;
b. The Government Performance and Results Act Process;
c. The Government-Sponsored Performance Assessment Rating Tool.


Return to “Debate Topics '09-'10”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest