Pip got it.
But the more serious issue is we seem to have an awful lot of people on payroll. And while itself isn't always a bad thing - there are so many people screaming when it is scrutinized, that it makes me think that there are some people who are simply having their tier covered and not doing anything to earn it.
As someone who pays tier and does not receive any sort of subsidy, I am paying them - and as a "tier payer" who has not intention of securing one of these "payola" subsidies himself, I do think there needs to be a call to accoutn of who is paid what, and for what. After all, it is MY tier that pays THEIRs.
Now, as a form of slow protest, I have been de-tiering down to one last 512 plot in AM until this is sorted out. I abandoned the other one this morning. And have been going from one of the biggest landholders in all of CDS down to this because of the finances I have been suspecting but are coming to light now. If I feel there is a cloud over our finances, I certainly can restrain my participation.
This morning I was re-examining the notecards of a number of people who stoiod for election and am starting to become more concerned for the CDS - as we have some cards that seem to propose things that seem downright unwelcoming, and xenophobic. By my eyes anyway. We have stiff armed a number of new citizens by both excluding them with out 33 day qualification for this election, rather than the 28 day once the cycle was underway. But we also seem to want to codify this sort of exclusionist attitude by the mandates people have set for themselves.
I will remind the RA that when you have 7 running for 5 slots - the mandate for an agenda is very very weak.
But at least I can console myself in that I am not subsidizing the insanity nearly to the level I was before. And the new citizens who are contributing their money to this - they will only take so much before we go back to a yellow plague. Be careful.
And Lord help you if you anger Pip ... he IS the largest landholder and tier payer. Unless he's on the receiving end of one of those subsidies, of course ... (Pip - this is a jab at them, not you)
Patroklus Murakami wrote:Bromo
I had businesses in mind for event sponsorship rather than politicians. Or individuals who want o contribute. Politicians could do so too, they can already. Manen had deep pockets for much of the time and sponsored a number of political events. Nothing wrong with that. I don't believe our citizens would automatically vote for someone because they sponsored Oktoberfest, I think they're smarter than that. Anyone who tried to 'buy' votes in that way could be punished by voters rather than rewarded.