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: Financial integrity in Higher Education.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Adam Smith 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: April 2086
Description[?]:
| At present the government pays for the son of the CEO of Rapula Cream Cheeses to go to university to study the philosophy of white supremacy in the 16th century. This does not seem to be appropriate use of the tax payers money. Additionally this means that July, the daughter of June Maybury, the toilet cleaner at Rapula Cream Cheeses, while being able to attend university to study Agronomic Engineering, is unable to obtain accommodation close to her department as the university funding is overstretched. She presently has to walk 6 miles every morning to her Milking Machine technology class which starts at 5 in the morning (Cows will not wait for the students) We thus propose to release a large amount of money to the universities to provide suitable circumstances for our youngest and brightest to study, by having those that can pay, do so. This means that the government can reduce the total tax burden on our citizens. Thus allowing June Maybury to return to study herself as well as allowing July to actually be housed in halls of residence near to the Agronomy school. We should stop funding those that can fund themselves. University grants are to be means tested and issued only where their absence would cause hardship and prevent someone from studying that otherwise would have the opportunity to do so. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Higher education tuition policy.
Old value:: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Current: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Proposed: The government subsidizes tuition only for students from families classified as low-income or poor.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:54:00, July 24, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | While not our most ideal solution, we support. Typos:"yoiungest,...actualy,... funbd" |
| Date | 20:02:25, July 24, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | ((You missed a few other typos as well.)) |
| Date | 20:54:44, July 24, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | ((sorry, those three just seemed to jump at me...If you found the others then I guess the same objective has been reached ;-) )) |
| Date | 23:49:31, July 24, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | The son of the Rapula Cream Cheese CEO would most likely go to a private institute of higher education. We prefer to keep higher education accessible to the middle classes, and not just subsidize it for people with incomes under a faux poverty line. |
| Date | 01:33:41, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | CNT, are you saying that this bill would pay for education for someone who makes under X LOD per year, but not if they make X+1 LOD, (but still cannot afford it without tax money)? Because that doesnt make any sense... |
| Date | 16:41:07, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | The current situation pays grants to ALL students in higher education regardless of whether the university is run for profit by a private company or run at cost by the government. Please do not misunderstand this. There is at the moment government money paying for every student. The only difference between private and public is where that money goes. We are proposing to stop this waste of tax payers money, and have those that can afford higfher education out of their pown pocket pay for it themselves. |
| Date | 19:37:27, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | is it a waste, or is it a wise investment in our future? |
| Date | 20:52:20, July 25, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | We are happy to invest in our future, where that investment is needed. Where it is not we prefer to let our citizens decide for themselves whether they wish their own children to have a good chance or whether they want to be stupid and short sighted. We believe, with good reason, that our citizens are generaly inteligent enough to invest in the future of their family. |
| Date | 05:25:00, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | the theory is that free education helps the whole country's prosperity. i'm willign to be convinced that's not true, but only if there's some facts as opposed to rhetoric. "no" for now. |
| Date | 14:33:45, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Financial integrity in Higher Education. |
| Message | The theory is that education, not free education, helps the whole country's prosperity. Free education for those that do not need it removes funds that could be used to invest in commerce and industry and directs them toward ends that may or may not be productive for the country. It does this by placing a tax burden on the worker, so that worker is not able to buy some national product and what we get in exchange is an expert in ancient Sanskrit here, a volleyball coach there and just occasionally an inexperienced manager with a head ful of theory and no practical knowledge whatsoever. That is not a good trade off for the country. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 137 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 152 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 148 |
| Random fact: RP laws follow the same passing rules as in-game variable laws. Laws that are not of a constitutional nature require a simple majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. Laws that are of a constitutional nature require a 2/3 majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. RP laws may be abolished a simple majority vote this applies to ANY RP law. |
| Random quote: "A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless." - Antonin Scalia |