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 Cost Reduction and Private Sector Efficency Act of 2410 (Part I)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Moderate Libertarian Party (NoCoalition)
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: November 2410
Description[?]:
| A bill to reduce the cost, size and scope of government by returning services to the private sector free from most government regulations and corporate welfare-style government handout/bailout subsidies. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Health care policy.
Old value:: There is a public health care system, but private clinics are allowed.
Current: There is a public health care system, but private clinics are allowed.
Proposed: Health care is entirely private.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:54:31, May 26, 2007 CET | From | Party Royale | To | Debating the Government Cost Reduction and Private Sector Efficency Act of 2410 (Part I) |
| Message | Absolutely not. Health care has benefits reaching far beyond the patient actually being treated, and public health care systems actually save money over private ones by encouraging preventative medicine. |
| Date | 18:52:30, May 26, 2007 CET | From |  Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Government Cost Reduction and Private Sector Efficency Act of 2410 (Part I) |
| Message | We would prefer privatisation with a safety net for this with low incomes. |
| Date | 21:48:53, May 26, 2007 CET | From | Moderate Libertarian Party (NoCoalition) | To | Debating the Government Cost Reduction and Private Sector Efficency Act of 2410 (Part I) |
| Message | While that may be a compromise, that's not capitalism. |
| Date | 22:48:55, May 26, 2007 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Government Cost Reduction and Private Sector Efficency Act of 2410 (Part I) |
| Message | Yes it is. You're looking for the phrase 'free market'. It's not (quite) that. |
| Date | 03:59:22, May 27, 2007 CET | From | Industrialist Party of Aloria | To | Debating the Government Cost Reduction and Private Sector Efficency Act of 2410 (Part I) |
| Message | Some want a private system, others want private. The CP could care less where health care comes from as long as it's around for the people. We have a perfectly good system and totally private would be good too. FCP we are happy with the idea of compromise, if it happened more often things would get done. Can we please have this compromise? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 119 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 374 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 107 |
| Random fact: "Treaty-locking", or ratifiying treaties that completely or nearly completely forbid any proposals to change laws, is not allowed. Amongst other possible sanctions, Moderation reserves the discretion to delete treaties and/or subject parties to a seat reset if this is necessary in order to reverse a treaty-lock situation. |
| Random quote: "Political institutions are a superstructure resting on an economic foundation." - Vladimir Lenin |