budget issues
Dragonmaster352
Mercury
Brend
Fedor
Open in chat • 4 posts (analysis)
• Page 1 of 1
budget issues
Dragonmaster352 » Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:10 pm
-
Dragonmaster352 - Storyteller
I was just enjoying some roleplay with the cabinet. When suddenly the Ministry of Defence asked additional funds from the Ministry of Finance. As I thought this was a bit sketchy and didn't see the immediate need for it, I started replying to ask for some explanation. As I was writing this a response, I thought it prudent to look at the Ministry of Defence budget.
It was at this point I realised the Minister of Defence was actually that damned Lock Ness Monster. Wait a minute, that's not right. Anyway, I saw a budget point called Upkeep Defence Fleets buffering, worth 1000
per 
. So I thought these funds were meant for the upkeep of Union fleets that were active. An added bonus I realised later that with these funds and the war tax that was being discussed, this would completely cover the upkeep costs of the active Union fleets.
Brend and Chris were not of the same mind as me as they thought these funds were meant to cover the costs of not having a home port like the Union fleets do and other such costs.
We all agreed the OOC reason for the point being in the budget was to eat money.
Seeing as we didn't want to waste time in the thread discussing this it seemed like a good idea to ask Mercury about this, as Brend isn't unbiased in this case because he is the chancellor and is under attack.
The link to the topic in question. (I have linked it so that the first post you see is the post where the issue starts.)
It was at this point I realised the Minister of Defence was actually that damned Lock Ness Monster. Wait a minute, that's not right. Anyway, I saw a budget point called Upkeep Defence Fleets buffering, worth 1000
per . So I thought these funds were meant for the upkeep of Union fleets that were active. An added bonus I realised later that with these funds and the war tax that was being discussed, this would completely cover the upkeep costs of the active Union fleets.Brend and Chris were not of the same mind as me as they thought these funds were meant to cover the costs of not having a home port like the Union fleets do and other such costs.
We all agreed the OOC reason for the point being in the budget was to eat money.
Seeing as we didn't want to waste time in the thread discussing this it seemed like a good idea to ask Mercury about this, as Brend isn't unbiased in this case because he is the chancellor and is under attack.
The link to the topic in question. (I have linked it so that the first post you see is the post where the issue starts.)
Mercury » Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:54 pm
-
Mercury - Storyteller
I've looked at this in detail and investigated what is going on (and have now voted on the related vote).
The budget is intended as the standard budget used when nothing is going on. It is not intended to cover every possible eventuality - that would make being minister pointless. Since war is not a "standard" situation where "nothing is going on", I believe the correct interpretation of this is to say that the minister indeed needs to find additional funds to pay for fleets that are actively engaged in battle. However, I also believe that regular piracy patrol to keep the Union operational under normal circumstances -is- covered. Hence the additional funds will no longer be necessary once the war ends.
Does this seem reasonable to everyone?
The budget is intended as the standard budget used when nothing is going on. It is not intended to cover every possible eventuality - that would make being minister pointless. Since war is not a "standard" situation where "nothing is going on", I believe the correct interpretation of this is to say that the minister indeed needs to find additional funds to pay for fleets that are actively engaged in battle. However, I also believe that regular piracy patrol to keep the Union operational under normal circumstances -is- covered. Hence the additional funds will no longer be necessary once the war ends.
Does this seem reasonable to everyone?
4 posts (analysis)
• Page 1 of 1