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: Freedom of Contract
Details
Submitted by[?]: AM Radical Libertarian 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: September 2101
Description[?]:
| WHEREAS No group is better informedthan the individual as to what contract terms are acceptable to said individual AND people are wise enough to make decisions for themselves and responsible enough to live with the consequences of said decisions Therefore, be it resolved that neither the Senate, nor the prefectures themselves, shal make any law or regulations in restriction of the individual's right to freely enter into a contract for any legal good or service; nor make any law or regulation restricting the right of enforcement of such contracts. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards alcoholic beverages.
Old value:: Alcoholic beverages may be purchased only from licensed sales outlets, and can only be available to adults.
Current: Alcoholic beverages may be purchased and consumed anywhere, but only by adults.
Proposed: Alcoholic beverages may be purchased and consumed anywhere, but only by adults.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Current: The government may not seize private property.
Proposed: The government may not seize private property.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Tort reform on non-civil lawsuits.
Old value:: Lawsuits may only provide money for medical and legal expenses.
Current: There is a cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Proposed: There is no cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the pension system.
Old value:: There is a compulsory private pension system.
Current: The state offers a voluntary public pension, combined with other voluntary private pensions.
Proposed: The state does not operate a pension system. Individuals must save up for retirement on their own.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change Positive discrimination.
Old value:: No form of positive discrimination is permitted.
Current: The government does not regulate hiring policies.
Proposed: The government does not regulate hiring policies.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change The workers' right to strike.
Old value:: All workers have the right to strike but certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society have to ensure a minimal service.
Current: All workers have the right to strike.
Proposed: All workers have the right to strike.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:55:24, August 22, 2005 CET | From | Söhne der Freiheit | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | We cannot agree to Article 7. This would allow the sale of arms to our enemies worldwide by opportunist expatriates. We will effectively be providing for international terrorism and rebellion worldwide. This cannot be allowed. |
| Date | 18:58:36, August 22, 2005 CET | From | Söhne der Freiheit | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | We are also wary of Article 5. A company may then unfairly promote candidates based on race or lawsuit threats in order to boost or maintain their image, and Joe Likaton loses his promotion, or even job itself because Jim Lodamun will falsely claim racism on the part of the business. |
| Date | 21:48:36, August 22, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | Article 7 is an area we are willing to compromise in, as it is an international matter. Article 5, however, is deeply tied into the concept of individual freedom and responsibility. If I truly own a business, who i wish to hire is my responsibility. If I choose wisely, my firm will prosper. If I choose to hire based on non-material issues such as race or religion, I will not be getting the best employees and my firm will not do as well as the one which hires based on ability. My choice, my responsibility for the consequences. |
| Date | 22:07:12, August 22, 2005 CET | From | Söhne der Freiheit | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | It's arguable whether that's true RLP. For instance, minorities sometimes band together with an "us vs. them" attitude. In this case, the minority will tend to frequent those business which cater to them by ensuring a certain percentage of their workforce is representative of that minority. Employers, seeking to tap the business of that minority will only hire the best worker when they absolutely have to, the rest of the time they'll employ minorities in an attempt to boost their image with them. |
| Date | 15:48:05, August 23, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | If hiring a minority spokesman/token helps the bottom line of the business more than hiring another worker, then that person is the best to hire. The purpose of a business is to make a profit, the 'best' employee is the one who contributes the most to that profit. If, however, a company does this too much they willbe forcing themselves into a niche market of the minority they placate, and will loose out on the majority of the potential customers. This is a choice each company must make. |
| Date | 20:41:27, August 23, 2005 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | I have a problem with 2,3,4 and 7. Art 2- Sometimes govt needs to build a road, to relieve traffic congestion or construct/ upgrade infrastructure. This may require the confiscation of some property. Without eminent domain America's freeways would not be possible to construct today. Art3- There is no market system that dictates the setting of claims, it happens often at the discretion of the jury. To be fair to both doctor and patient, the suit should have a cap so that every Tom, Dick and Harry does not decide to sue his doctor at the drop of a hat. Art4- Frankly this is a good idea, but only in theory. In practice, most people ignore their retirement needs (OOC: In America most people start saving in their 40s and grossly underestimate their retirement needs. This generation especially.) So we need some kind of overseer to gently nudge Likatonians to save more and save early, so that they won't be out on the streets come retirement. Art 7 must be made a bit sterner . Free export is a little daunting, and not too wise from a security standpoint. |
| Date | 21:31:13, August 23, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | Article 7 was doubtful to start with, so in the spirit of compromise, it has been removed. Article 2 - If the road is economically justifiable, the government can afford to buy the land at a mutually aggreed upon price. If the price is too high to build, then perhaps the road is not that important. Article 3 - the abundence of suits can be better avoided by a loser pays system of legal costs. If you know that if you lose, you owe for both sides bills, you won't be suing at the drop of a hat Article 4 - Education, tax benefits, all fine gentle nudges. But if people don't make good choices, they suffer consequences. If they aren't allowed to make choices, they never learn how to do so. |
| Date | 02:53:34, August 24, 2005 CET | From | Söhne der Freiheit | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | In defence of artticle 4, the precedent of the state being able to decide what's best for the people economically can only set the stage for a welfare state, I fully support it. I will be willing to vote yes to this bill if our positive discrimination ban is left in place. |
| Date | 10:47:13, August 25, 2005 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | Although I still disagree, I have delayed your bil for too long... So i'll just support it as is and then try to change things later. |
| Date | 00:06:20, August 26, 2005 CET | From | Imperial Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Contract |
| Message | Many of these laws seem like overkill. There is a midway point between policies highly restrictive on progress and national well-being and on smothering regulation. Not all people know what is best for them and can get themselves hurt or killed if they are subject to no regulation. This act will hurt city planning, public saftely and health, and possibly put many services in critical demand during un regulated strikes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 69 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 118 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: All role-play must respect the established cultural background in Culturally Protected nations. |
| Random quote: "If voting changed anything, they'd abolish it." - Ken Livingstone |