Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: January 5461
Next month in: 01:59:03
Server time: 18:00:56, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): hexaus18 | 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: IC International Agenda

Details

Submitted by[?]: Gaduri Resistencia

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 2413

Description[?]:

Why should we prevent people from living in this country?

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date01:27:12, June 14, 2007 CET
FromCapitalists for Prosperity
ToDebating the IC International Agenda
MessageThis is an insane bill. Border control is necesary for the sake of security. Wanting to destroy it is naive and pathetic.

Quotas on immigration are necesary for national prosperity. Unregulated immigration leads to too many people coming here and stealing away jobs from people already here. This hurts the economy and soon, you won't have anybody wanting to come here because it has become a hellhole. Furthermore, it doesn't allow for the people here to assimilate. Instead of assimilating, the immigrants will retain the culture exactly as before and live in communities exactly in the shape as before their arrival. Instead of a melting pot, we end up with multi-culturism. The people of a country are united through some kind of link. When you have multi-culturism, the link between the different cultures is destroyed. This often creates strife, war, and xenophobia, destroying the country. There is a historical precedent for this. Do you honestly want this?

As for the policy towards tariffs, it is necesary to discourage tariffs upon our own products. While we do like free trade, the current policy is good to make sure the free trade is mutual.

Date14:33:29, June 14, 2007 CET
FromGaduri Resistencia
ToDebating the IC International Agenda
MessageFirst and foremost, as we are communist, we can easily create more jobs for those who need them. As for your slightly xenophobic rant about foreigners destroying culture, the government runs assimilation programs to ensure people integrate into society. On the other hand, we believe that people are quite welcome to retain their previous cultural behaviors/traditions/religions should they so wish.

Border control is not necessary for security for the simple reason that we have tight enough internal security not to need to worry about it.

As for tariffs, the reciprocal approach is just pathetic eye for an eye behavior, and benefits nobody.

Date17:55:34, June 14, 2007 CET
From(GCCP) H.P. Sauce Committee
ToDebating the IC International Agenda
MessageWe do need border control so change that and i will vote for

Date20:02:55, June 14, 2007 CET
FromCapitalists for Prosperity
ToDebating the IC International Agenda
MessageWe already argued against the idiocy behind the government magically creating jobs.

As for your mention of us being xenophobia. That is an utter lie. We enjoy a melting pot within our country. We enjoy immigration. Immigration in moderation helps much more than it hurts. However, as with all things, when it isn't in moderation, it ends up hurting. As for the cultural problems, no amount of integration programs can integrate the flood of immigrants that come when you just open the gates. When that occurs, multi-culturism is created and the link between people of a country is destroyed. This causes the problems outlined above. Just look at Europe. They opened the gates to every person who wanted to come, and the immigrants never integrated. Now, there are problems with extremists as well as a separate, shariah law being created.

As for the argument about border security, why allow dangerous elements to be let in in the first place when you can stop them at the border? What about problems with diseases? Do you really want to make it easier for diseases to spread from country to country? Not to mention, there is the need to prevent unregulated, illegal immigration for the sake of the people already here and legal immigrants.

Finally, as for the "eye for an eye" ideology applied to the tariffs, so what if it is an "eye for an eye" ideology. It benefits everybody because it discourages any eyes from being taken in the first place.

Date20:27:20, June 14, 2007 CET
FromGaduri Resistencia
ToDebating the IC International Agenda
MessageHave you ever been to Europe? As a person living there, I can assure you that the only discrimination I ever see goes from those established here to those who aren't. There are far more people here in Britain spouting white-only rubbish than there are calling for jihad, I can assure you. Most immigrants just want a job, and Gaduridos can provide. The key to ending the problems associated with immigration isn't quotas, it's dealing with the prejudice of established inhabitants. Don't delude yourself there.

As for border security and tariffs: I will admit to only having put those in to boost visibilities: the chances of this bill passing were always fairly slim.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
 

Total Seats: 88

no
    

Total Seats: 263

abstain
  

Total Seats: 84


Random fact: The forum contains a lot of useful information, it has updates to the game, role playing between nations, news and discussion. http://forum.particracy.net/

Random quote: "My tenure will be controversial and it is, quite obviously, true that I am the most right-wing Prime Minister this country has seen in several decades.” - Margaret Woodhall, former Dranian politician

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 71