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: Energy supply validation
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Authoritarian Movement
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: July 2494
Description[?]:
With this law, we can guarantee a minimal power supply in case of danger, which is independent from certain companies. Furthermore we prevent monopolys because we can offer all companies equal rights to supply the grid with power. This will lead to more competition and cheaper energy prices for our citizens. OOC: It's exactly the same discussion like we can see in the European Union at the moment, where they think about segregating the Grid from the energy producing companies. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on the nation's power grid.
Old value:: Multiple private companies each own and maintain sections of the national power grid.
Current: Multiple private companies each own and maintain sections of the national power grid.
Proposed: The national grid is fully owned by the state.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 09:05:58, November 28, 2007 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | "I don't see why handing over such a massive slab of the market to the State is going to gurantee power in an emergency. You'll have to explain why a government will do a better job then profession, private corporations competing between themselves." ~James Allan, Shadow Trade and Industry Minister |
Date | 10:36:27, November 28, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | Because state-run organizations are motivated by a desire to remain popular and thus secure their future. Private-run organizations are motivated by a desire for profits and cost-cutting, often if not always at the expense of the consumer, which is what led to events like the California energy crisis several years back (another victory for capitalism by Enron). That would not have happened if energy was nationalized. |
Date | 13:38:12, November 28, 2007 CET | From | National Authoritarian Movement | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | What if a company, which owns a significant part of the power grid gets bankrupped. Should thousands of our citizens remain without a propper energy supply for some days, untl somebody takes care for this grid? Furthermore, we want an unrestricted entrance to our power grid, so that new companies can start producting energy without having to build up an own grid. |
Date | 14:10:49, November 28, 2007 CET | From | Irish Party | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | The NAM makes a good point. We vote yes. |
Date | 10:03:05, November 29, 2007 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | OOC @ ZRSP: Your new here so I'll be tolerant. Zardugal has a strong RP spirit. We don't refer to real-life events. Ruins the fun for everyone. It's a habit most new players struggle to break, but do make an effort not to. Thanks :D IC: NAM obviously understands little about economics. Massive corporations like the one you use in your example don't just go bankrupt overnight. It's a long and drawn out process. By the time the corporation closes down, all it's assets would have being handed over to new owners. I doubt the turbines would ever have stopped running during the entire process that can last for years. I'd also like to consider what happens to nationalized corporations if they go bankrupted. The burden falls on the tax payer, typical the rich, who, ironically, own the competition. The only good thing about corporations failing in the free-market is corporations who manage themselves better take over and reap the rewards. State run corporations could, no, will be a drain on the economy and the tax payer's wallet for decades and a Authoritarian Communist government would only whine about how the evil capitalists aren't letting them tax at 100%, which would be their only solution." ~James Allan |
Date | 17:15:14, November 29, 2007 CET | From | Irish Party | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | The point of this scheme isn't to make a profit (though that is always a goal in itself), but the point is to provide a necessary service to our citizens in which we can monitor and ensure that this is a consistant service where no body is left behind through bankruptcy of these companies. |
Date | 01:50:58, November 30, 2007 CET | From | Saiserist League | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | What the Liberty Party fails to understand is that the extra bit of tax needed to provide for the State's maintenance of the power grid will be more than compensated for by the alleviation in their monthly electric bill, as it will finally force private entities to act properly, it will be a major check on their excessive power. The Liberty Party also seems ignorant of the simple fact that there are countless instances of corporations failing, indeed, overnight. When they control something like energy this leads to a mass of catastrophes on the grid. It is however, difficult for nationalized corporations to go bankrupt because they are funded by the people themselves. Incidentally, it is right that the rich should contribute more than the poor, and in this way everybody pays what they can afford rather than solely being charged on consumption. OOC: Sorry, will refrain in the future. However, this makes argument much more difficult because it makes it impossible to use demonstrations to attack arguments. |
Date | 07:32:59, November 30, 2007 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | OOC: The reason the rule's there is because if someone decides to RP a party whose views don't match their RL politics, they don't get hit by a whole pile of RL situations they themselves if they were arguing against their RP Party. Plus it kinda ruins the atmosphere. You're welcome to post stuff OOC though. In fact, I'd invite you to find an OOC situation where a massive energy corporation has gone broke overnight. IC: I'm saying that if it is absolutely certain that energy corporations will fail overnight, I'd rather a day of no energy as private corporations quickly whip up the effected areas into their grid, after years of paying for cheap energy from corporations that compete amongst each other. Compared with the second option, where government bureaucrats who've no idea how to run a corporation send the entire grid provider into what would be bankruptcy in a free-market. In a Socialist system, it translates to a massive tax hike. Why should the rich pay more then the poor? Because they work harder they should give up more? The government has a "right" to redistribute wealth? That would require the wealth to belong to the government. Whatever government claims the "right" to "redistribute" the wealth produced by others is claiming the "right" to treat human beings as chattel." ~Michale Tucker |
Date | 14:41:40, November 30, 2007 CET | From | National Authoritarian Movement | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | It is simply a lie that someone who onwn more money doest work harder in general. If this was true, managers of big companies have to work 1000 times harder than their workers - which is complete nonesense. |
Date | 03:14:30, December 01, 2007 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Energy supply validation |
Message | "If pay was not an issue, I know I'd rather be stacking shelves 9-5 then managing the Supermarket." Michale Tucker |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes |
Total Seats: 167 | ||||
no | Total Seats: 234 | ||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: If you are likely to be logging in to Particracy with the same IP address as another player with an active account, please inform Moderation on the forum. Otherwise your account could be inactivated on suspicion of multi-accounting. |
Random quote: As for rape, of course, that is a direct consequence of the capitalist system of oppression. Capitalism relies on fuelling division and resentment to sustain itself, and so it sets men against women, race against race and so on. Men rape women because they are being oppressed by capitalism, so they take it out on women. Under Communism, there will be no rape, because there will be a full and natural harmony and equality between the genders. ~ Friedrich Pfeiffer General Secretary of the Dorvish Communist Party |