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: Post Offices Regulation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Rutanian Democratic Forum
Status[?]: passed
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 2566
Description[?]:
| Regulation of private post offices. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the post office
Old value:: Only private post agencies exist, and the services they provide are unregulated.
Current: There is a nationalised post office agency. Private post offices are allowed to exist but the services provided by them are regulated.
Proposed: Only private post agencies exist, and the services they provide are regulated.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:42:32, April 17, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Party | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | What are some of the services a post office does that make it need regulation? |
| Date | 01:33:34, April 17, 2008 CET | From | Federal Rutanian Libertarian Union | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | Regulation in this area, we believe, would only hamper the delivery of post and other like postal services within the Commonwealth. |
| Date | 08:55:36, April 17, 2008 CET | From | Socialist Green Party | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | we ask the same as the Commonwealth Party |
| Date | 09:54:45, April 17, 2008 CET | From | Rutanian Democratic Forum | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | Yes, all post services should be regulated. Liberal Party, why do you think that? Arguments, please! |
| Date | 22:02:59, April 17, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Party | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | We need understanding of whats proposed first... |
| Date | 16:20:40, April 23, 2008 CET | From | Capitalist Working Families | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | LPR, the ONLY "regulation" that this bill puts on private post offices is that which protect CONSUMERS in the public (common) interest. [ ; ) ] |
| Date | 18:36:16, April 23, 2008 CET | From | Rutanian Democratic Forum | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | oh, come on, CWP, RDF supports and will support the claim that market cannot be infinitely effective, i.e. the theorem "there is no free lunch" is not quite correct. This is also supported by newest (~10-20 years) research results. Consequence: Market NEEDS some regulation, or it can very easily crash (even heard of 1929?) p.s. OOC: and when I mean research results, I mean it. I can quote it, if you like. From _real_ scientific journals. |
| Date | 03:14:48, April 24, 2008 CET | From | Commonwealth Party | To | Debating the Post Offices Regulation Act |
| Message | The CWF answered my question... |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 279 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 59 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 261 |
| Random fact: Cabinet ministers who disagree seriously with the head of government would usually be expected to resign. Parties within the cabinet may attempt to manoeuvre to replace the head of government though, for example by proposing a new cabinet bill or voting for an early election. |
| Random quote: "The one bonus of not lifting the ban on gays in the military is that the next time the government mandates a draft we can all declare homosexuality instead of running off to Canada." - Lorne Bloch |