Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: December 5460
Next month in: 01:08:04
Server time: 14:51:55, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): Paulo Nogueira | Spiguer | 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: Child Support Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: Liberal Democratic Party

Status[?]: defeated

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

Voting deadline: August 2370

Description[?]:

This bill will propose to amend existing law by granting Child Benefit to families in need such as low-income and large faimilies. Currently, the government denies its people in giving aid to families in need. It is a basic right of a citizen to know that the government will take care of its people when they are in times of need.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date17:26:46, March 06, 2007 CET
From Moderate Republican Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageWe cannot support this measure because it gives child benefit to large families, even if they are wealthy. Wealthy people can have a large family and still receive unneccessary child benefits at the taxpayers' expense. We believe child benefit should only be provided to families classified as poor or low-income. Low-income families can be large or small and still receive child benefit payments.

Date17:59:20, March 06, 2007 CET
From Liberal Democratic Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageThat's not what this bill does. If you don't understand a bill, you should abstain. This bill gives relief to large families in need, not generalized large families. This bill helps low income families as well in their fight to remain financially liquidated in society. If there are large families they will be aided as they should be because they must support a larger amount of people in their lives. If they are wealthy, this will not apply to them.

Date18:43:41, March 06, 2007 CET
From Moderate Republican Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageThe wording in the proposal is "The State guarantees child benefit to both low-income families and large families."

Nowhere in there does it mention needy large families, contrary to the L.D.P.'s claims. We feel putting the wording "large families" is repetitive if the L.D.P. only wishes to assist low-income families. Poor families can be either large or small and still receive govenment payments. We will fully back a new proposal that allows child benefit for ONLY low income families. However, we cannot support this proposal because of our concerns that the system will be taken advantage of by large, wealthy families.

Date18:51:58, March 06, 2007 CET
From Liberal Democratic Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageWe still believe that the government should give aid to families if they have large amounts of children or members. The family should have equal opportunity and be set back by such limitations. This is equality for all. What the M.R.P. suggests is like saying every poor person should have a lawyer provided by the government but everyone else has to find their own. The point is equality so that all have the same opportunities and choices as everyone else, not just a select crowd. Everyone should have equal rights no matter if they are wealthy or not. And, you will find that most families that do have numerous children are usually more financially cautious and less secure. Many children means insurance, tuition (for some schools), health costs, living costs, etc. But, believe what you want. If there is no convincing the M.R.P. then why should we try?

Date19:00:55, March 06, 2007 CET
From Moderate Republican Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageThe LDP's comparison to the right of every citizen to have a govenment-employed lawyer in court is innaccurate. A wealthy person can choose to have a govenment-employed lawyer represent them in court, but they might be better off hiring their own lawyer because he/she may have more experience then any govenment appointed lawyer. This does not apply to child support. If a wealthy family has a large amount of children, they will most likely take the option of govenment money because there is no such thing as low-quality money. $100 is still $100 whether it comes out of a govenment account or a personal account.

Date19:10:13, March 06, 2007 CET
From Liberal Democratic Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageThe M.R.P. obviously missed our point, another reason why they don't understand what's going on here. In Jakania legal representation is only paid for the poor. That is what you suggest here, not giving relief to all people, just the extreme destitute and still only giving them about a $5 for a candy bar that's already half eaten. And the government should be equal in all cases. That is why our example met perfect standards for the logical mind. Why just give the poor legal representation just because they're poor? Shouldn't every citizen have the same right to legal representation whether or not they choose it? Why give just the poor child benefit? Shouldn't a family with many children that is middle class have the same opportunity for benefits because their spending is spread thinly?

As always though, attack our lesser points because you have no come back against our stronger points.

Date20:23:18, March 06, 2007 CET
From Scientific Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageNah, MRP's right on this one.

Date21:00:23, March 06, 2007 CET
From Liberal Democratic Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageWell, there's a suprise. We were never fooled about your vote in the first place.

Date21:22:05, March 06, 2007 CET
From United Democrats of Jakania
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageI'll support...but I would have prefered "the State gurantees it to all families"

Date21:30:43, March 06, 2007 CET
From Independent party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageMatt why would you vote no on this. It helps family who cannot afford a good education or life for there children.

Date21:46:39, March 06, 2007 CET
From Liberal Democratic Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageWell, (to the U.D.A.) I would, but the opposition won't even let this lessed version through!

Date03:23:10, March 07, 2007 CET
From Moderate Republican Party
ToDebating the Child Support Act
MessageDue to its affiliation with the Allied Protectors of the Supremer Council alliance, the MRP begrudgingly votes "yes" on this issue.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
     

Total Seats: 210

no
  

Total Seats: 265

abstain
 

Total Seats: 5


Random fact: Cultural Protocol bills must provide a real-life equivalent or short description for the ethnic groups, languages and religions contained in them, such that it would be easy for an unfamiliar player to understand (e.g. "Dundorfian = German"). Where appropriate, they should also provide guidance to players on where to find help with translations and character names. This might include, for example, links to Google Translate, Behind the Name's Random Name Generator and Fantasy Name Generators.

Random quote: "When strangers start acting like neighbors, communities are reinvigorated." - Ralph Nader

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 73