by Psychodad » Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:17 pm
Going back up the thread, it has been stated that in the real, nations have no ability to seize or collect on tax debt. Ladies and Gentlemen introducing the greatest seizure organization in the world, THE IRS!
If you have assets in the US and piss them off, they can be frozen, seized and disbursed. Until recently, Iran had mega dollars that were frozen in the US and were earmarked to pay reparations to the families of the hostages from the late 70's. Then they released the funds back to Iran so they could build airfields for the Russian Air Force, thanks Obama. But I digress and am loathe to intro RL politics to this discussion.
Point is, if I am a citizen of Lower Slobovia and I intend to slip away and become a citizen of Upper Slobovia but I have debts owed to Lower Slobovia, I might be able to slip away but would not be able to take my assets with me, they would be seized and sold to cover my debts, further I would now be an outlaw in Lower Slobovia with all the rights and privileges associated with that lofty position.
I suggest that in keeping with no automatic seizure of assets prohibition stated previously by CJ, we prevent a player from leaving a nation if tax debt or even loan debt to a national bank (player banks under the nation flag?) until they go before the council and negotiate a settlement for all, any or none of the back taxes owed. If the departing player chooses not to wait, then they can leave but assets (gold, goods in warehouses located in the national ports, ships) will not go with. Further, the applicant to the new country would have to be approved by that nations council who would be apprised of their bad debts. Of course the scurvy dog could become a pirate. Maybe a percentage chance of being able to make off with ships in the night.
I am fond of the bounty system, I would suggest that it go a step further in that countries could issue to select players Letters of Marque, allowing them to pursue, destroy and plunder enemies of the state. I would suggest that the bearer of the LOM have no hostility assessed when carrying out their duties. The circumstances of the LOM would have to be a verifiable transgression such as debts owed or hostility against the country, but not just capricious annoyance.