The Future of Austria, A Discussion

This just deserves a

Well of course when you say it that way it sounds bad.

To be perfectly fair, if these numbers were anywhere before 1990 - they wouldn't be as so militerized. Well, for Austria they would be crazy anyway you put it (after 1956, 'course) however there's no true reason why I must be a trailer to an increasingly militant world... Austria, this time, will be a first outlier.

It has 35,000 active troops 'currently' IRL, however everyone participates in the army at some point, in their lives, in the military. It's one of the RL and IG quirks of Austria - like the Alps but slightly harder, frostier. So while that while it is still prudent to base as many of `my divisions off of some core troops who are currently in service - it is not automatically a restriction considering (pure speculation starts around here) that at the very least 450,000 men have recently did their obligatory military stay. Making additional training, and additional troops within a speedier timeline, only a hop - skip - jump away.

As for the criticisms of not being motorized, a certain Heer was only 20% motorized at the height of her power, when she took on the Free World; why shouldn't I try with the same?

Don't forget the SDU!

Spezielle lenkende Einheit?

Anyhow...

See, this is just asking for a true 'Military Keynesiast' to come along and tell you how all this military spending would actually increase the economic power of the Eastern Empire. Personally, I'm (ironically) a Austrian (maybe more of a Chicago believer, to be fair, I do like my Edgeworth box!) however there is a strong case here that the reforming of Austria's economy can be further accented by a increase in government funding.

Where is Agnaposte when you need him?

My advice is for you to just be content to sell me as many Panzers as you can build...

I'm inspired now to just throw Russia to the Communists, tank my economy, and nuke everyone that my ICBMs can reach, and then arm every man woman and child with a Kalashnikov and have them abandon their lives to charge headlong into every country that borders my nation until they're all dead.

Totally fucking inpsired.

Soviet Union II - Electric Boogaloo.

It seems to be the cool thing to do around here, to use North Korea's logic-free military budget system and manpower system, tank your economy building or buying every super duper next generation weapon you can get your grubby hands on, and then somehow conscript your entire population and then cry big blue tears when it all falls apart.

So why the fuck not? I'll start today. Nukes are flying at Washington, Bejing, London, Madrid, Berlin, Paris, Tokyo, Sydney, and everyone else that I can throw one at. And then we'll just clusterfuck it all up. HOOFUCKINRAY! I'M A COOL KID NOW BECAUSE I'VE RUINED MY COUNTRY! I WANT A NEW COUNTRY NOW THAT I'VE BUMFUCKED MY CURRENT ONE SO I CAN RAPE THAT ONE TOO WITH MY IMPENERATIBLE BULLSHIT LOGIC! HUZZAH!

Fucking assinine is what this is. Austria is a landlocked country, for fucks sake, why do you have a goddamned navy? And they havent done shit since they were with the Hungarians back in WW1! Christ. My brain just blew up from all the stupid.

I think you mixed that up. Advance your economy.

Well, you’re Russia - slightly more important than Austria, which I believe is a slight, but significant difference. One of the reasons why I stood with Austria for so long, someone correct me if I'm wrong, is that I sincerely thought one of the 'benefits' of a smaller country (inside Europe or not) was that there was significant leeway to create RP opportunities considering the most likely path would be... Election, debate, election, debate, election, diplomacy, election, debate... Et al.

Also, I think there is something about WMD RP restrictions - is there not?

Otherwise, if you feel that inclined; feel free. There is undoubtedly potential to organize a RP off that much talked about opinion poll released indicating that most Eastern Europeans considered their lives better under communist rule. I can hardly but believe those feelings are absent, if not higher then thought, within Russia.

Finally, but not lastly... I am a touch offended that you believe I would honestly "leave" one of my countries... I have yet to have more than one country per round, which is a lot better then you can say. Yet now all of a sudden I am thrown in the stereotype that I am one of 'them' that 'always' change their country 'all the time.'

That- I am disappointed in.

I'm pissed off for more than one reason, and I felt the need to rant. Frankly, I could give two shits less what you do.

Oh, okay.

Cheerio then!

Your logic falls into a frequent trap. A militarized state =\= a militarized society. North Korea is a militarized society: the military permeates every facet of life. It is also a militarized state, since the military consumes the lion's share of revenue. Prussia was a militarized state, but it was not a militarized society. Austria-Hungary was never either. So, really, you don't even have a history to draw upon.

You can't even allow population growth to bolster your numbers, because the math doesn't work out. You couldn't even replace theoretical losses at this level. Your military has no business being greater than the number of potential recruits received every year.

Germany requires every student learn English from grade six on. That means they have up to seven years of English lessons before getting to their respective university. Despite that, the vast majority of the population does not speak English. Why? Because it's not a high priority. Military service isn't something to aspire to in most European countries. It's like community service: get in there, do your job, get out, get on with your life.

And the women that make up half your population do not fit your criteria.

Germany had the benefit of being an industrial juggernaut, world-renowned corporations (which could get loans when Germany couldn't), a plethora of extremely talented individuals, and a massive population base. Austria imports far, far too much and has a population far, far too small to match Germany in that regard. To make matters worse, you'll be pitted against Germany in this theoretical war.

Wrong. Keynesian economics say to use government spending to offset a lack of private spending in times of recession. If you're blowing your entire budget on tanks every year, you're not stimulating economic growth.

The problem is that the military does not produce anything. They simply consume. For all intents and purposes, they are unemployed persons with slight capital to throw at the service industry. It's not a bad idea to expand your military if you've got a small army and high unemployment, but when you're transferring people from shopkeeping and manufacturing into the military, you've got a problem.

Considering Austria is planning on having a larger military than Germany, no. This will start an arms race you will lose.

This is just a inconclusive point... You say Austria is X, I say Austria is Y and we just continue till we're both sick of it.

I can't even replace the army as it fights old-age, which is interesting. No one has had a draft army where the median age is likely 'old.' Heh.

Did you just equate English to learning how to live or die in a military situation again?

I love the cultural implication.

That's true! Still, 450,000 isn't as big anymore.

You say 'industrial juggernaut,' I say 'wrecked ruin.' Tomatoe, tomato, eh?

Oh come on, we know America didn't invest in Germany after getting the shaft after WWI; I haven't read many books on the exact finances of the Weimar Republic but what little I did read it didn't seem a fantastic investing enviroment.

No, seriously... Keynesiam is interpreted that way these days on MSNBC, but honestly - I'm not making this shit up - Keynes did make a such a distinction along those lines to only a certain point; he really does make no theoretical distinctions that spending undertaken on certain times has its own vitality beyond a political aspect. It's not like he had XYZ to explain government spending during lean times, then the economy fundamentally changed on some level when the times were good so XYZ is bad, ABC is in.

I'm not well read with him, but it basically boils down to the economy is a 'blob' that is increased in so far as more spending is increased; that anything is fine as long as it furthers the goal of 'full employment/utilization.'

Which, to be fair, this would accomplish.

I'm sorry, I don't ever know Keynes of ever having a problem with running over production in the highway; he was never a believer in Say's Law afterall.

We can do this all day, heh?

See, now you just sound like a Free Market type, which honestly makes me hard to argue the point.

Heh, well finally we get down to something concrete.

So if you can't sell the weapons, Recon won't sell the weapons (I'm 'guessing')... Grr, I guess this means I do have to cut back.

Damn, you guys are a bunch of prudes.

The average soldier will learn how to fire and clean his rifle, how to maintain his uniform, and how to address officers. That doesn't change the fact that most of your new military is out of shape, will have to re-learn just about everything, and, the real problem, you have neither the means nor the ability to train enough officers.

Third largest in NATO? Largest in the world by ratio?

What the fuck is not 'big' about this?

Thyssen, Krupp, Mauser, Rheinmetall, Zeiss, Audi, Porsche, Volkswagen, BASF, Bayer, Bosch, Daimler, Blohm + Voss, Siemens... the list goes on and on. What do all these companies have in common? Not only are they currently active (although Thyssen and Krupp merged into ThyssenKrupp, which owns Blohm + Voss), they were all involved in at least World War II, and a few were involved in World War I. The material was destroyed. The technical know-how was not.

What we know is that America repeatedly loaned capital to Germany so Germany could pay her reparations and so France/Britain could pay their war debt to America. Indirect investment, if you will.

That interpretation is incompatible with Keynes' response to a recession. It's hard to use your financial capital as a ballast when you're already all-in, so to speak.

And, honestly, you're coming across as the "whatever I do, the economy grows" type of player right now. If this system of economic growth works, North Korea would not be a cesspool.

I'm an asshole IRL, I really am or at the absolute minimum I used to be. I'm critical, I have something of a short temper resilience to what I consider 'stupid' (which ranges far and wide) and worse yet: I never give out honest compliments. Honestly, I'm fairly sure that I am going to grow up an old bachelor with no one to know, like or love.

Yet on this game I like to portray myself as something of a consensus seeker. I hate to see people argue on such a good community as this one, it seems like a valuable waste of time, writing et al. I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but I have done what I could to not be a complete arse - instead I have done what I could to buck the internet trend in which 'basically' everyone enjoys their anonymity by being the biggest, complete, jerk off the world of internet has seen. This may seem naïve, this may seem like many things however what I hope most of all: is that this seems like a gentleman, polite, way of reaching a vague sense of accord.

Now while I doubt anyone 'here' would admit to caring about any form of my life, I can hardly withhold that as of late I have noticed that what I've tried to do here, be a nice guy, has come very close to changing my actual life. Like some sort of relaxation technique of my more overly critical parts of my mind; I'm becoming less and less of an asshole. I still really want to be a dick, I really do, but it seems like this has helped me through that awkward stage of my life so that I don't believe the 'entire' world is really a bunch of idiots. I think it's this, maybe it is or maybe it isn't - however I feel that my life has been vastly improved by an effort to stick to certain principles, yet undoubtedly seek to avoid outbursts.

So in an effort of 'solidarity' with those nice, new, feelings that have let me discover some old, but now new, friends. A new girl, alongside an assortment of general 'okay' feelings I'm having with the wider world... I will happily RP a withdrawal of the more exciting- er, eccentric portions of my nation. I see no reason why this silly experiment with Austria should somehow become a great schism that ruins the game for me anymore then this escapade already has.

I honestly did not foresee this all this discussion - I forecasted Schwer and Recon having some salient points that I most sincerely believed they would write it off as "your country is going to die, but have fun man. Peace." Basically, what they have done to dozens of other people, a dozen other nubs they expected never to post again yet there was little else to go off to be honest. Maybe I expected 'better' treatment; however what I did not expect from Schwer was a seeming hostility, unexplainable from my perspective. Recon, I hope, will not be much worse yet all I can expect is more of the same – just with more damning points.

CipherHornet was just out of line, it was - frankly - an embarrassment to this whole site. Unless it has significantly changed since the time I joined, I haven't noticed that frank discussions on the zanier (crazier, but at least an element of respectability) RP ideas are met with what amounts to a Hubris-esque rant, without the flair or humor.

Moving on.

What this amounts to is a effort to avoid any deliberations that inherently destroy the community of this board. A community that has survived many obstacles, one of which should not be the future of Austria – especially an Austria that I have (to be honest) not much wrapped up in. That is, not much beyond that this 'Austria' I have started playing since the round began. Which is silly, when considering that I’ve been here how long yet I still managed to honestly misjudge facts, most about my fellow RPers, but I will be the first to admit that it also included my bias to turn the back the clock on Austria. No matter how much I want too, I cannot say that such a prejudice about one idea over another, deserves this much OOC attention.

To wit, while some may just shrug this as a shallow attempt to concede points not because of a particular argument - just a general knowledge on my part of how on the internet, someone always has to 'win.' I contest such a declaration with that this is an honest and sincere acknowledgement of my own shortcomings.

I will not await a moderator decision; however it would not be ignored if made. All I can say is that I hope I will be allowed to, effectively, withdraw some of the legislative points through a fun RP; then resume with a much more leftist and/or divided government. At which point, after I have returned Austria in a IG year or so to what it was in 2009. I will be happy to return it to the great big NPC player in the sky. You know how it is, introspection and renewal.

Cheerio,
Max

EDIT: Ah, tried to get this in before Schwer posted again. Ah well, sorry about stepping on any forum etiquette there; Schwer, I didn't read the post (sorry) and I don't plan on. Just so I can have this happy mental prototype of you, that includes among other things, feelings of respect.


EDIT II: I hope this makes sense, I tried to add some clarifications but hell - it's late.

EDIT III: This has been an exciting afternoon, eh? Many edits, I know.

I don't know where Schwer gets the idea that he has any right to give anyone carte blanche about anything. That attitude is the only thing on this site that needs to go.

Not that the ruling will have any effect either way, so i won't bother with some long-drawn out ruling that explains why it would be staunchly in Moorington's favor, or reiterate that I have full faith in Moorington as an RPer to do what is right by Austria and what we've come to expect from these boards. I won't point out the inherent hypocrisy in Schwer's criticism of Austria, of all things, expanding it's military, nor will I dissect Schwer's RPing fallacies, one by one, to show that he, indeed, is no better than Moorington, and in fact does not deserve to criticize Moorington -- who, at the very least, worries more about an entertaining and enjoyable RP that shakes up the norm rather than winning some perceived battle, in addition to having contributed exponentially more to this and other sites than Schwer can even dream of.

Moorington, we've played together on a lot of forums. You're one of my favorites, and I have full faith in your abilities as an RPer and as a player to make us an exciting storyline. Wanna stick around and finish it without regard to Schwer's asinine criticisms, please do. If not, your leaving is one of 21c's greatest losses.

Schwer, your habit of running people off the board is getting real tiring. This is number four. After I've slept, I'll decide if it's worth a ban or not. I won't rule on your future with this site while I'm so disappointed in the turn of events that took place today.

After further discussions in less public and clearly less sensationalist areas, Moorington appears to be staying. We're presently hammering out a better way to go, so that Moorington isn't lumped into that "ruin and leave" group again. It's sorta like how Lord of the Rings was such a good trilogy that it was copied so many times it more or less became cliche. If that makes any sense.

As for the carte blanche comment, it's referring to my willingness to not care about something. If I was still a mod, I wouldn't have made a ruling on the matter anyway: conflict of interest and all that.

Yayness!

I have a bit of a suggestion on something here.

Obviously, there is a bit of a...problem with these incessant destructions of nations and whatnot.

What I propose is a kind of classification system. Not so much a ranking (who's the best) but a levels kinda thing.

I've seen it done on another RP. Where they rank certain things, and the higher you are, you get some benefits. They use like..metals sorta. Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum.
Say for instance, your ranked...like Gold here. That would enable you to be able to RP certain events and blah blah blah.
Platinum, would be for those few elite, who might be permitted a better nation (IE: US, Russia) and could Rp other things (super secret cyber hacking for instance).

The classifications would preferably be done by moderators, with Admins getting final say.

It would help identify the specific needs of certain players.
It could look like this:

Bronze: Player is identified as needing help with basics, and understanding the abilities of his/her nation. Would not be advised to permit to play as Class B nation

Silver: DEFAULT. Player is identified as having fair knowledge of his/her nation. Would not be permitted to RP as Class A nation

Gold: Player is identified as having knowledge of the structure of the nations government and the capabilities at hand. Also is fairly active in helping new players. Class A nation can be Rped, but it is not advised if there are Platinum players who desire Class A

Platinum: Player exemplifies mastery of understanding of his/her nation, and displays these skills in regular RPing. Player is a regular guide to other players on ooc boards as well, who has the true aims of furthering the board unity.

This could go hand in hand with ranking certain nations.
IE:
Class A: US, Russia, POSSIBLY China UK, France or Germany, and other special cases.
Class B: (Most certainly) UK, France, Italy, China, Germany, Brazil, Japan, Australia, Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia

SOMETHING to that effect. Just an idea mates.

I hate to have lengthy replies to conclude disagreements. Indeed I felt my last one (points up) would invoke a lot of helpless exclamations of 'grow up' but who knows, I'll never.

Thank you Dax for the kind words. You know the feeling is mutual and I'm glad that someone can stretch their neck a little out there to make sure life goes the direction we all too willingly let slip by. I will be more then happy to stick around while I hope to never cause such creative differences and such OCC excesses again. I’m glad you feel a certain respect for the board, especially where I am concerned and hopefully this will be the first, last, and only instance where such decisive statements will be needed to keep a resemblance of order.

To make a lengthy story short, me and Schwer sat down at a very quaint German bistro 'n' talked shop.

There was no knowing, where we were going; however it was good food.

He has, with much respect and sociability, presented his suggestions - in a manner that was both humorous and convincing. While undoubtedly a sharp tack from his previous statements, I do not doubt he was completely sincere in his new found reasonability as well as honesty. Schwer is a complicated guy, with some interesting motivations and personal struggles one cannot hold him explicitly responsible for.

21c has the ability, requirement even, to express ourselves through a calm, understandable, way. This has been accomplished and Dax, have no doubt that a Europe lacking Schwer; would a Europe lacking a motor. Not only because we would be without Germany, but we would be without a very vital component to ‘our’ Germany which has powered the game countless days. I’m against a full banning, or suspension; Schwer has a set of highly attuned moral compasses (of sorts, more like RP Compasses) and while he has some trouble presenting the ideas in a way that are explicitly agreeable. It shouldn’t ruin the game for him.

On a side note, steps can, are and will be taken to ensure that Schwer's suggestions will be balanced within any additional writing undertaken by myself with my initial plan. While the most appropriate metaphor would be some sort of metallurgy, fire and metal or something of that nature - you are all just going to have to imagine it. 'Cause frankly I'm tired but glad that this has been sorted out with the speed, precision, and exquisite ability this board is known for.

Cheerio,
Max

EDIT:

I think Bugs has a very interesting idea.

I whole heartedly Disagree With Mr Bunnyrabbit.

Little nations have the tendancy to be alot harder to RP with then a bigger one, it would be putting a novice in a Bi-plane and then expecting him to learn the skills to fly a F-35, its not going to happen.

While the majority of people have RPing skills, or the general know how, the majority of people I have seen lack the foresight and indepth enthusaium that is so prevlant on these boards, confineing new players to a rank system that will determine weather or not they could be allowed certain nations, is on level with the idea to post a RP snippiet before your accepted.

I may be losing my point, but that happens when im not blunt and talk shop. In anycase.

With a small nation, while it will build up your skills to a acceptable level, and provide a wealth of RP experiance you need to have some skills, and knowledhe to do that in the first place, Since this game is going by Realism, I would venture to say a fair few people got no clue wtf to do, Honestly standard RPing practise would be to buy buy buy, build up and war, with diplomacy on the side.

These boards have alot more to it then that, theres the whole "You twitch one toe out of line, and the whole world will beat the fuck out of you." System, ALA UN/NATO, where picking a nation pretty much confies you to that role.

Picking USA automattically pretty much guarentees your unable to do whacky things, since there would be a realism check on almost everything.

PIcking Russia would by default alienate you from the rest of the world, and if experianced players were the other countries, you could get pretty rooted.

While a smaller country does offer signifigant chances, and paths to choose from they are not clear, take for example Boznia Hergowhatit.
IF i had to choose that country, I would be pretty clueless as to WTF i would do, since my gut instincts would be telling me to cozy up to someone, but the underlying polticial background kinda forbids it, with the World having to sign any changes to B-H, not to mention the "Worlds gonig to militarily rape you if you try funny crap."

Bigger nations offer much leeway to new people when they play, while they may end up running the US into the ground like the USSR , essintually putting the US in USSR, the thing is they would learn alot more, and see what there impact would be on the world.

If a small nation went on a rampage, most people like "meh.." and carpet bomb it to the stone age, or cmopletely crush it and setup puppet government alla Maun. but with a bigger nation, if they do something like a crazy policy, the whole worlds affected, they can see what they do and it matters what they do.

Example.
Ukaine invades Moldova, Noone would have a hessitation with imedately launching a aircampaign agaisnt ukraine while then trying to negotiate.

Other Example.
Indian war thingy
Notice how noone intervenes with the extensive alliance system? ala Sarajevo 1914 Its because donig something there = Everyones going to get there Shiz ruffled.

Confining new players means they could get easily swatted to the side, and then they would take the "can i change nation now?" route, which is highly probably.


NOW IM NOT SAYING that everyone new is a noob and is going to do such a thing, but I am saying people who are looking for a RP may / may not be able to provide the deapth you guys do, and confiding them to a smaller country is akin to saying "Meh.. even if you play your not going to do anything noteful."

Since honestly, if Chad attacked <insert generic African country> whats going to happen? UN debate.. yadday yadda yadda, launch counter offesnive, wham fixed in a week or less depending, not to mention tiny impact.

While this could teach someone "Oh, maybe i shouldnt do that." It also has the adverse affect of "If i try and alter the powerbalance in anyway shape or form, im doomed" Exactly like real life.

IF we wanted to do this exactly like realife Then I would be a politicion, Instead I wanna play out what I thing ukraine should do, and vice versa, while realism is good some non-realism is nessasary..



Hrm.. Ive lost my point.. Seriously.. anyhow rank system = Bad.
if you can find my arguement in there somehow, you deserve a medal.. because i lost track of it 3 lines in...