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: Freedom to Farm
Details
Submitted by[?]: AM Radical Libertarian 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: April 2118
Description[?]:
| We believe that subsidies to any industry are harmful to the economy, the nation, and the receipiant. The economy is harmwed by retaining inefficient entrants in the marketplace, the nation is harmed by increased opportunities for corruption and decreased self reliance, and the receipiant by having the government in control of his business. This being the case, we look to free the small farmer from government regulations concurrant with accepting the King's Shilling. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Current: The government allows local governments to craft agricultural subsidy policy.
Proposed: The government denies subsidy assistance to farmers.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:08:35, September 22, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | No we must support peasants farmers who follow their traditional ways. We must not support the continued decline of traditional farming simply in the name of profits. And we do not think it is wise to suggest that farmers living in poverty should join the Armed Forces. |
| Date | 22:34:30, September 22, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | I was speaking metaphorically in refering to the current subsidies as the King's Shilling, not suggesting a carreer change. In either case, when you take the government cash, you get the government orders. |
| Date | 00:17:17, September 23, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | Um, what king? shilling? we only have likaths. This is a phrase we are unfamiliar with. Nevertheless we must oppose this bill, as we feel that the corporatisation of farming is not only decreasing diversity in our countryside but decreasing the quality of the food produced. |
| Date | 05:37:18, September 24, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | The AAP opposes for quite a different reason. There are some areas of Likatonian geography that are poorly suited to some types of farming - but well suited to less-profitable forms. In many cases, THOSE less-profitable forms are 'valuable' in non-financial terms... because they protect eco-diversity, for example. The AAP thinks of these subsidies LESS as a way of funding small farms, and more as a way of REWARDING good stewardship. We shouldn't ALWAYS look at the balance-sheet to assess the 'value' of something. |
| Date | 00:14:13, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | More, very good reasons to oppose. |
| Date | 17:29:19, September 27, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | If we wish to support alternate, less profitable use of the land, that can be done directly by having the government purchase the land and incorporate it under the parks system. The poor of our land pay the largest percentage of their income for food, and subsidising less efficient farms drives up these costs. We should not make the non-farm poor support the farm poor. |
| Date | 15:35:22, September 28, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Freedom to Farm |
| Message | And so to vote: |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 68 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 134 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 73 |
| 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 strength of a nation derives from the integrity of the home." - Confucius |