Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: June 5461
Next month in: 01:10:44
Server time: 14:49:15, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): dannypk19 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.

Bill: Government regulation of pollution in industry

Details

Submitted by[?]: MetaMenorPhists Party

Status[?]: passed

Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: April 2085

Description[?]:

Currently:
The government enforces moderate pollution restrictions.
Proposal:
The government enforces highly restrictive industrial pollution standards.

We discussed this before - if you had time to read - if not please read the answer I gave to ALF Party for the proposal of reducing restrictions to some ... sticker system:
"ALFP ... you splashed this bill right in the middle of a hurricane ... which is not pollution related, but is going to change your mind on few aspects related to mankind conservation in long terms (preventing nuclear wars extinctions etc) ... and as you cannot see further than any Bush can ... you will say that a hurricane left you just with a question: is ecology needed? ... these who plans an ecologic propagandistic world war from some time on Earth are just about to exult ...
On which side are you going to play particracy then ... is my question (!) - to myself ...

I suggest that STRONG - "highly restrictive" is not the word, is just the wisdom of fear and the propaganda of war - STRONG is the word, strong enforcement and "reinforcement" with new technologies in the industry is what we should vote for, but momentarily ... as a responsible state we must use these "highly restrictive" words as they belong to the game design (as the only resource suggesting "high responsability") and as we don't wait to see irresponsible people when they will begin to understand, we act NOW with the ireprochable responsible attitude for the situation inflicted - better known from the deserted lands or razed forests as "ecologic earthquake" ...
Our country is however poor and has not much to fight against ....

On the other hand the ecologic disaster which we interprete like it is today ... it is the fault of the government from before ... 10 or 40 or 60-70 years before ... it is not us who made this an emergency, but it is us who must take the advantage of this change ... the ecology is an attitude similar with good manners and respect and religion, traditons somehow disappeared today ... it will be a good change in the cultural evolution. The best changes are expected from there.

I give an example ... I propose the third - highly responsible attitude toward ecology - and after one year you propose to merge smaller farms into larger, you'll see afavourable opinion for your bill, as I will generate it from today (implementing the law I say its needed) ... OK?

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date11:33:32, July 20, 2005 CET
From MetaMenorPhists Party
ToDebating the Government regulation of pollution in industry
MessageA favourable opinion for your bill from th population ... cause I already wait to vote YES, I said I agree with alrger farms but wait time to chang people opinions on this when you will have a fair advantage from voting YES and me too ... Now I explained again all the story.

Date07:29:47, July 21, 2005 CET
From Anarchosyndicalist Libertarian Front
ToDebating the Government regulation of pollution in industry
MessageFirst of all, my party didn't propose to reduce any restrictions! It's your mistake! We are strongly pro-ecological so we protest when CP has reduced restritions!

Date02:46:37, July 22, 2005 CET
From MetaMenorPhists Party
ToDebating the Government regulation of pollution in industry
MessageYou must read that you said in the title of your bill: CUTTING REGULATION ON INDUSTRY, which for me seems not "cutting" industry - which is not my idea too, neither yours - but means to cut the curent regulations ... and there is an alternative for the current law which says what you support (now you say not) or
"Industrial pollution is not regulated by the government." ... When I read your bill I believed that you mostly reffer to this alternative ... another way it was to reffer to whatever you haven't said in the title - which alltimes is more important than the content or such importance it has the title enough to determine the sense of the content of the description - please say it is not you who told us the bill with that title and I believe you ... On the other hand the proposal you made was described as a matter of colors not as a matter of technological improvement with significant investitions in this field (from the private owners this effort is hardly believed to come without some enforcement) ... takes time till becomes a new religion and culture, but is not much to say first about these and later about the colors you had upon your mind. I am afraid that we both made a mistake ... you who did not explained it straight from the title ... me who didn't asked you before in debate - but I have the excuse that I wasn't registered as player here at that time ... SUCCESS NEXT TIME ... If you wish so much this law I let you propose it ... the law for the hardest enforcement ... I wait your answer before I put my bill to the vote ... I hope you don't mind for these misunderstandings. MORE SUCCESS AGAIN !!

Dear friend (ALF Party too) I read again the "law" currently acting as "starting point" to understand what will be used of it "downthere" and after which will begin the downside "interpretation" of how to use it better ... and I am afraid that Today's Governmental Guidelines are exactly what you proposed before with green-yellow-orange-red sticks according to the level of pollution ... just Guidelines based on colors ... these makes no difference if invade our markets with colors telling the pollution level for some products ... we need to enforce the producers technologies not the markets carneval colors.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
 

Total Seats: 38

no

    Total Seats: 0

    abstain
          

    Total Seats: 489


    Random fact: You can view helpful ideological statistics about the regions in your nation on the region pages. You can also view detailed political opinions and the importance of them there as well.

    Random quote: We are in politics not because we hate our fellow man, but because we love him. ~ Anton Weinreich, General Secretary of the Dorvish Communist Part

    This page was generated with PHP
    Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
    Queries performed: 44