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: Industrial Support Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Partisans And Artisans League
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: September 2086
Description[?]:
| The PAL believes that industry is always more efficient when run by the private sector so we propose that the government subsidizes failing industry when they face bankruptcy instead of taking them over because this leads to a large burden on the taxpayer. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on industry and subsidies to industrial operations.
Old value:: The government acts as an investor of last resort, by nationalizing failing industries that provide vital goods or services.
Current: Certain industries are owned by the state, all others are under private ownership.
Proposed: The government subsidizes private enterprises that face bankruptcy.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:02:25, July 24, 2005 CET | From | Social-Liberal Party | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | We propsoed this earlier so it would by hypocritical of us not to support it. |
| Date | 00:27:09, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Catholic Workers Movement | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | Ah, but will you? ;) |
| Date | 01:00:18, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Social-Liberal Party | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | (annoyed) Yes, yes, we will. OOC: bastard :P |
| Date | 05:19:03, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Beluzian Labor Party | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | Labor opposes subsidies for the private sector. If a necessary private industry is unviable, then surely this is a demonstration that private enterprise isn't always the best way to manage things. Labor believes in Government playing a role to improve the lives of everyday Beluzians. Financially propping up private companies which have already failed merely prolongs their death and ensures a continued strain on the taxpayer! Such organisations need substantial organisational change, which may frequently require the Government to step in and take over their administration entirely, if only for a time. Giving tax payer's money to private companies which are already failing is not a sound investment - it is money down the drain! |
| Date | 16:18:06, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Catholic Workers Movement | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | This may come as a shock, but: The Catholic Workers concur with the Labor Party. We do not support welfare for failed corporations. |
| Date | 23:39:18, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Partisans And Artisans League | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | Labor: What if your beloved public 'enterprises'/bereaucraticmonstermachines isn't "viable"? |
| Date | 23:40:21, July 25, 2005 CET | From | People's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | Supporting failure is communistic! The Survival of the fittest is the only way to ensure a healthy corporate jungle! |
| Date | 23:42:19, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Partisans And Artisans League | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | CWM: We don't support support for failed government nonsense. humph! (I thought I would add an appropriate right-wing noise) This is a side note but its got to be said that U2 rock. |
| Date | 01:32:27, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Neo-Marxist revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | The NMRP agree with the CWM and BLP, a private enterprise is quite simply that a private enterprise the government should not be responsible for their subsidisation. |
| Date | 05:24:30, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Beluzian Labor Party | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | To the honourable PAL member, you are talking specifically about subsidising failed private companies. In the event that a government owned business or public utility becomes non-viable, then it will be the responsibility of the government of the day to address its problems in way it judges best. The difference of course is that a Government is entitled to interfere in publicly owned businesses to ensure that they do not become non-viable - surely the PAL isn't suggesting that the Government interfere in private companies to... ah, but I forget myself, that is exactly what the PAL is advocating! The PAL is advocating that the tax payer subsidise private companies. Labor stands for free enterprise where it is practical, government-ownership where it is absolutely necessary, and responsible use of tax payer's money in the best interest of every Beluzian, not in the irresponsible spending of that tax payer money to bail out failed companies. |
| Date | 10:43:05, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Free Beluzians | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | The Free Beluzians feels that the current standard is adequate. |
| Date | 18:23:01, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Partisans And Artisans League | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | Nah we should privatise the government as well.... |
| Date | 19:28:26, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Partisans And Artisans League | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | What is more of a burden on the government - a giant, public, money-munching industry or a wee bit funding for some private companies? |
| Date | 19:29:34, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Partisans And Artisans League | To | Debating the Industrial Support Act |
| Message | Say yes for a horrible, commercialised world! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 106 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 194 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Character names must appear plausible and should consist of at least a first name and a surname. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented |
| Random quote: "If democracy is ever to be threatened, it will not be by revolutionary groups burning government offices and occupying the broadcasting and newspaper offices of the world. It will come from disenchantment, cynicism and despair caused by the realization that the New World Order means we are all to be managed and not represented." - Tony Benn |