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: Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Falangist 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: June 2562
Description[?]:
| A bill to encourage an even stronger private sector and even more free economy. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The banking system.
Old value:: The government operates large, national banks, but small community based private banks are allowed.
Current: The government operates a central bank and all other banks are private.
Proposed: The government operates a central bank and all other banks are private.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The policy regarding eminent domain is left to local governments.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The government may not seize private property.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 11:20:41, April 11, 2008 CET | From |  Capitalistic Liberal Front | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | agree. we can also afford to cut some corporation tax, and still have alot of money left in the budget. |
| Date | 11:44:40, April 11, 2008 CET | From | United Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | We do not agree with 1 or 3. |
| Date | 12:06:42, April 11, 2008 CET | From | Capitalistic Liberal Front | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | Why do you not agree with article 3? |
| Date | 14:35:22, April 11, 2008 CET | From | Academics Party | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | We totally agree with all articles |
| Date | 22:10:42, April 11, 2008 CET | From | Christian Falangist Party | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | Capitalist Liberal Front and Academics: Thank you. United Freedom Party: We are willing to negotiate on those provisions (for instance if you have a different corporate tax rate in mind). Article 4 is by far the most important part of the bill for us. |
| Date | 09:49:35, April 14, 2008 CET | From | Academics Party | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | To generate growth in in the private sector, tax'es got to be lower. We share your scepticism regarding article 1, but this bill has too many important articles to be voted down. United Freedom Party, we ask you please to reconsider |
| Date | 07:15:46, April 15, 2008 CET | From | Socialist Worker's Party | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | Articles one and two we can handle. Article three we will not support. I seem to recall having proposed a bill that included article four. I wonder when it changed. Hmm.. |
| Date | 17:23:34, April 15, 2008 CET | From | Christian Falangist Party | To | Debating the Economic Reform Bill of 2559 (Old articles 2 and 4) |
| Message | In the interests of getting some of these needed reforms passed, we are going to split this into two bills. One will contain articles 2 and 4, the other articles 1 and 3. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 112 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 124 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 64 |
| Random fact: RP laws follow the same passing rules as in-game variable laws. Laws that are not of a constitutional nature require a simple majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. Laws that are of a constitutional nature require a 2/3 majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. RP laws may be abolished a simple majority vote this applies to ANY RP law. |
| Random quote: "The theory of Communism may be summed up in the single sentence: abolition of private property." - Karl Marx |