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: Retirement Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Workers' Autonomy Socialist 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: March 2407
Description[?]:
| Measures to help ikradonians to live in a better way their golden years. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the pension system.
Old value:: The state operates a compulsory public system combined with an optional private pension.
Current: The state offers a voluntary public pension, combined with other voluntary private pensions.
Proposed: The state operates a compulsory, public pension system.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The professional retirement age.
Old value:: 70
Current: 65
Proposed: 65
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:10:48, May 17, 2007 CET | From | Ikradonian Interest | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Most of these legislations have been changed lately from the bills you propose to the current ones. This was supported by II because we consider 'any fee, better then no fee'. We don't want to make people dependant, we don't want to encourage drug use, we want to give people the choice between the state and private industry, we want to encourage people to actualize themselves. We will oppose these comunist measures, only article 5 is debatable. |
| Date | 17:07:36, May 17, 2007 CET | From | Ikradonian Interest | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | make that article 7 (retirement age), the articles are in a different order all of a sudden... |
| Date | 19:06:22, May 17, 2007 CET | From | Workers' Autonomy Socialist Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | OOC: Sorry, I tried to change the order but only accomplished to be left almost without proposals. Maybe the order is automatic. |
| Date | 22:49:56, May 17, 2007 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | This appears to be an attempt not to aid Ikradon's workers, but to hurt its businesses. This bill appears to come from the illusion that the Ikradonian economy is that hurting the captains of industry will help its foot soldiers. The economy is not a zero-sum game of class warfare. |
| Date | 23:44:15, May 17, 2007 CET | From | Bicky Forever - MSCC | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Why so much proposals in one time? There's little chance you reach a majority... Our opinion: Article 1: No, we like it like it is. Article 2: Okay, but current legislation is also okay. Article 3: Okay, but current legislation is also okay. Article 4: 60 is better than 70, so yes. A time ago, we proposed 68 and 65, but almost everyone said "no". We prefer 65 by the way. Article 5 + 6: Surely a brave step in the right direction. Article 7: Yes! |
| Date | 01:38:22, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Workers' Autonomy Socialist Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Actually, the WAM idea is to split the bill on 3 (tax raise, healt system, retirement). However, we decided to preliminary debate it as a whole because we believe that beside the single proposals, the important thing is to reconsider the role of the state in the welfare of the ikradonian society. |
| Date | 10:23:54, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Bicky Forever - MSCC | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | We can live with this. |
| Date | 13:32:34, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | The objective of this bill seems to be to ban private entities from offering pensions. Again the TP would like to remind the WAM that restricting corporations and helping workers are not the same thing. |
| Date | 13:46:57, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Workers' Autonomy Socialist Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Private pensions funds are just an excuse for making workers to donate a portion of their salary to the financial capitalists, receiving just a little portion of the profits. For this reasons, we believe that state pensions give the workers the option to invest the difference and getting all the money they deserve. We do not need some rich lads getting richer with other people sweat. |
| Date | 14:31:47, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Ikradonian Interest | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | This is unpayable, currently 50% of our income allready goes into social services, those extra 10 years will require even more. This will place its burden upon the active community and industry resulting in a lower taxincome. How will Ikradon fund its social services then? Further we think people should have the choice between a private and a state pension fund, a free choice. |
| Date | 15:01:10, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Workers' Autonomy Socialist Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | We have a 6,2% surplus on our budget, when a 2% is much more than we need and than even a very conservative economist will suggest. There is a little "treasure" that we might distribute among our fellow citizens. However we agree with II that the system need a gradual reform, considering the inhuman retiremente age. So for the moment we are reducing our proposals to 65 years as the retirement age. We will try to reach the 60 years in the next legislature. |
| Date | 15:02:14, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Workers' Autonomy Socialist Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | notice that only 4 nations do worse than use in the retirement age. |
| Date | 17:26:32, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Lyika ati Isọdọtun | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Why should we limit the retirement options of Ikradonians by only allowing a public pension program? |
| Date | 18:16:13, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Bicky Forever - MSCC | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | To FFP: our opinion is that everyone who works must have the right to gain an equal pension after his retirement age. Private pension systems can often be paid only by the richer workmen. |
| Date | 18:29:02, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Ikradonian Interest | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Why can't the Ikradonian people select whichever service they prefer? If firm X offers a better deal than the government, I would go there... Could BF specify what it means with equal pensions? |
| Date | 18:43:47, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Workers' Autonomy Socialist Party | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | Private and public pensions are financed by a percentage of the workers salary. If I earn a lot, my pension will be big, if i'm poor or unable to work (housewifes, persons with disabilities), my pension will be miserable. As we know, the market do not take care of inequalities, so it's the job of the state to do it, acting redistributives policies in order to guarantee everybody a fair living standar after their retirement. In order to do that, we need rich people pensions, but, of course, we do not propose the equality of pension for everybody (at least in this economic system). As II pointed financement is an issue. We have the money to do this, as we stated, but we could use it for other purposes. However, retirement age is so outrageous that in order to pass at least that article, the WAM is willing to split the bill and vote both articles separatedly. |
| Date | 19:39:39, May 18, 2007 CET | From | Bicky Forever - MSCC | To | Debating the Retirement Act |
| Message | To WAM: as we said, we prefer a retirement age of 65 rather then 60, but 60 is better than 65, so you have our support! To II: just as WAM, we don't advocate an equal pension for everybody (to avoid any misunderstanding), but we want to stress that a private pension system implies that some people cannot afford it. Why would a private pension insurance company insure a person who cannot pay enough for a good pension? Capitalism / free market isn't perfect, surely when talking about social issues! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 209 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 390 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If you have a question, post it on the forum. Game Moderators and other players will be happy to help you. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "The problem is big government. If whoever controls government can impose his way upon you, you have to fight constantly to prevent the control from being harmful. With small, limited government, it doesn't much matter who controls it, because it can't do you much harm." - Harry Browne |