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: Time Limit on Minimum Income
Details
Submitted by[?]: Free Market 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: February 2105
Description[?]:
| This bill allows the government to continue providing a minimum income for citizens, but only for a reasonable period of time. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Guarantee of minimum income.
Old value:: All adults not supported by another person shall be guaranteed a very basic subsistence income by the government.
Current: All adults shall be guaranteed a very basic subsistence income by the government.
Proposed: All adults not supported by another person shall be guaranteed a very basic subsistence income by the government. However, the provision of this is not to exceed a certain period of time.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:28:41, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Rational Future | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | Disagree. This will lead to greater extremes of poverty if implemented as some people are considered unemployable. |
| Date | 21:31:29, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Unio enim si quis Motus Populi | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | What is to be a reasonable period of time? 1 month? 2 months? 1 week? It is the government's job to protect the people. If that means supporting them until they can do it themsevles, then so be it. Cutting them off before they are able to support themselves doesn't help anything. |
| Date | 21:58:06, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Free Market Party | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | The current law allows individuals to collect an income from the government for their entire life. There are no requirements that they seek employment. Because of the lack of incentives to seek a real job, it is inevitable that the free rider problem will lead to a class of individuals who live off of the government for as long as possible—which, as previously stated, will be their entire life. Some people simply won't choose to ever support themselves when the government has already chosen to support them. If we assume that this bill provides for people until they reach our official retirement age of 60, then that means the effective time limit on this bill is 42 years (60 – 18 = 42). If the cutoff is not at 60 then this policy can be continued in excess of 42 years. There is already a time limit if you look at the numbers. Nobody lives forever. We would be happy with almost any time restriction that is lower than 42 years. The current policy is a recipe for disaster. Free-riders exist in every economy in the world, and our government’s policy attracts these types of people. It is an economic problem that can and should be avoided. A time restraint will help a great deal. We propose that a minimum income be provided for no more than 24 months, except in severe circumstances. Two years is adequate time for most individuals to find a new job. We believe that anybody who lives off of the state longer than this has become dependent on the government for subsistence and is no longer truly seeking to suppor himself. |
| Date | 22:50:44, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Party of Evil | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | What is worse: creating free riders or homeless beggars? (Serious question!). |
| Date | 23:53:29, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Unio enim si quis Motus Populi | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | I would risk a small amount of free riders to help the greater of society. Not supported. |
| Date | 09:59:26, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Free Market Party | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | "What is worse: creating free riders or homeless beggars? (Serious question!)." We do not assume, as you do, that individuals will be unable to find a job for 2 years. We also do not assume, as you do, that private charity groups will never step in to help individuals. Therefore, we consider your question to be loaded. If there are homeless beggars it will not be the governments fault. Our unemployment rate is currently 5%. This shows a strong economy where individuals can nearly certainly find a job in 2 years. If you are unhappy with a 2 year limit then let us raise it to 3. Or 5. Or 20. Will it be the government's fault if an individual cannot find work in a 20 year period? We think not! We are open to debate on the exact time limit, but we do not believe that individuals should be allowed to live off of the state for their entire life. |
| Date | 10:49:55, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Capitalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | We agree with the proposal, however I would suggest that the government be responsible for creating large-manned corporations, of which people whom have been unemployed in the excess of two years, will be given a forced job there. If they are legitimate, they will continue to look for a job they would prefer and they would remain unbothered by such a system. If they are bothered however, then they are obviously one of these people. Under such a system, Kundrati's (otherwise) unemployed will be guarentee'd employment after two years of job-searching. And all without adding to the strain of the State's welfare budgets. In the meantime, it will also remain as an incentive for lazy individuals to find more suitable, or more enjoyable work. |
| Date | 14:02:16, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Party of Evil | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | (OOC: FMP, the reason I'm less optimistic in this than you is that IRL I am rapidly approaching the two year deadline, and so far all my attempts to find a new job have been fruitless. So, my perspective is a bit different than yours.) |
| Date | 17:40:40, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Unio enim si quis Motus Populi | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | "We do not assume, as you do, that individuals will be unable to find a job for 2 years" And we do not assume, as you do, that individuals will be able to find a job for two years. OOC: I'm in the same boat as VIP. I've been trying to find a job now for two years so I don't have to keep asking my parents for money while I'm at school. So far, no dice. IC: You say charity groups will support them then. Charity groups depend on donations. Do you pretend to think that everyone will then donate to these groups to help house and feed those who have been cut off prematurly. I don't know about you, but last I checked you can't feed a family with good intentions. You can raise the limit all you want. It could be a 99 year limit, we still won't support. You want to cut off a whole group of people based souly a a very, very, very small minority of them. |
| Date | 01:46:22, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Kundrati Revolutionary Movement | To | Debating the Time Limit on Minimum Income |
| Message | An automatic minimum income is necessary to have a functioning market-based society that is not based on coercion. It is only when people do not have to worry about starving to death or going cold or homeless that people can truly be said to be freely choosing how they live their lives. A small number of people will be satisfied with the bare minimum - good for them. Most everybody else will want more of what is available, and they will be free to persue that. A society should provide a floor below which one cannot sink, no matter what happens. The fairest and least intrusive way to do this is to provide everyone with the barest of necessities. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 75 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 190 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 1 |
| Random fact: Did you know you can change the official name of your nation? All you need to do is draw up a new name that is in accordance with the Nation Renaming Guide, pass a bill proposing the name change with a two-thirds majority and then post a request to Moderation on the "Renaming Requests" thread. You can change city and region names in this way too. |
| Random quote: "A leader has the vision and conviction that a dream can be achieved. He inspires the power and energy to get it done." - Ralph Nader |