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: Government is not a war profiter.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal-Progressive Union
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 2114
Description[?]:
| This bill puts the making of weapons out of government control, and into private companies. These industries recieve no government funding or subsidies. The government is not in the buisness of producing weapons, therefore it doesn't fall under strategic industries that are run by the government. Since war is rare, the making of weapons in peacetime is useless and hardly strategic. A private company can handle the weapons buisness. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's defence industry.
Old value:: The state owns all defence industries.
Current: The state owns national defence industries but these exist alongside privately owned defence industries.
Proposed: Defence industries are privately owned and not subsidised.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:52:20, September 20, 2005 CET | From |   Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | The government should not be involved in any defence ownership.Private defence companies are better than state run industries because that is their only priority and during wartime , it is the profits that private companies make that win wars. |
| Date | 21:04:00, September 20, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | We're not going to risk a coherency hit and will keep our no vote. |
| Date | 21:38:05, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | It;s been long enough for the bill to lessen. I don't think it will hurt you. |
| Date | 21:44:50, September 20, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | From my party page:- Government Responsibilities moderate big government moderate Market moderate regulator moderate I'm just guessing but I think that they are the ones that this bill will affect. The bill that created the current system only passed 4 months ago (http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=17484) (note that if people keep the same votes then this will not pass). I'm not going to risk it and maybe let the USM into power through the seats I would lose from this. |
| Date | 22:02:07, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Ok, but my supporters always pull through for you in the 2nd round of HOS election. |
| Date | 22:10:19, September 20, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Interesting that my polls suggest that your supporters actually prefered the USM in the second round... |
| Date | 22:20:23, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Really, thats strange. |
| Date | 22:23:34, September 20, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Public companies should not be a war profiteer. The government makes no profit as weapons go directly into our army. We'll say no. |
| Date | 22:23:54, September 20, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | I think my victories have been due having approx. 75% support from WSS voters in the second round but that's not to say yours haven't helped. |
| Date | 22:26:23, September 20, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Allowing private industry complete control over the arms industry is a risky endeavour. Though I admit to being unhappy with the current legislation, we would prefer that there be Government owned arms industries operating alongside the Private ones. Our full position on this subject can be found at the above link provided by the United Blobs. |
| Date | 22:32:27, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | "The government makes no profit as weapons go directly into our army" Ha, they make billions during wartime. Most politiicans are buisnessmen who make money in the stock market. It's no concidence that after both wars emded here, it was the mosr prosporous time in history. But anyway.. |
| Date | 22:36:31, September 20, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | "Most politiicans are buisnessmen who make money in the stock market" I can't speak for the other parties, but I can assure you that none of our 94 USM parliamentary representatives does this. You also argue that 'they make billions during wartime'; but then again, there is the choice - do you want the government to make money, or would you prefer them to leave the army defenceless? |
| Date | 23:00:59, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | I was redsponding to you whos aid they dont make any money during war. Your the pacifist here who would like to leave an army defensless. and by claiming defense companies are evil, but have no problems once the government is in control. Nationalisation seems to cheer you up everytime, even for war. |
| Date | 23:10:28, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Nobody likes me, I always vote alone. Why?..... |
| Date | 17:06:30, September 21, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Government is not a war profiter. |
| Message | Think about it. The government provides the arms for the army, in order to let them serve. You are opposing this because you don't want them to be an 'arms profiteer' - yet you're happy to let private companies construct and sell arms to make their money. Who's the war profiteer? The big businesses. We think this is wrong - someone has to equip the army, and we'd prefer a system which means CEOs don't bask in millions from sociali unrest and blood. I would like to leave an army defenceless eh? That's why i'm voting for a sensible way for our forces to be equiped. At least we don't persistently try to force citizens to serve in the army against their wishes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 128 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 272 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: "Doxxing", or the publishing of personally identifiable information about another player without permission, is forbidden. |
| Random quote: "Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity." - Albert Einstein |