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: Economics Changes Act 2116
Details
Submitted by[?]: Nationalist Freedom Party
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: November 2116
Description[?]:
| Money makes the world go round, so lets make sure that money flows into Kanjor. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on advertising
Old value:: Only advertising that meets certain set standards is permitted.
Current: Only advertising that meets certain set standards is permitted.
Proposed: All advertising is permitted.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The right to gamble.
Old value:: Gambling is legal, but only in private homes and casinos with special licences.
Current: The legality of gambling is a matter of local governments.
Proposed: Gambling is legal across the nation, no regulation whatsoever.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 20
Current: 30
Proposed: 18
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning phone services.
Old value:: The state subsidizes the phone service of low income families, and regulates the rates providers can charge for phone service.
Current: Telephone lines are provided free of charge to all citizens.
Proposed: There are no regulations on phone service.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:26:14, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | Article 1: I am sure this law is what's keeping companies from using nude women to sell products on TV so I wouldn't be so quick to illegalize this. Article 2: I don't like this because it could lead to too many casinos in one area rather than being nicely spread out as this law would provide. Article 3: The economy is in a deficit, and you just proposed an income tax that would put us 41billion dollars more into deficit, yet you want want cut the luxury tax too? Obvious reasoning trouble here if you ask me. Article 4: I like providing poor families with communication because it is vital in the parents' ability to apply for and attain new jobs. An employer needs a phone number so he can call back, but if you don't have a number that's an impossibility. Also, I'd like to regulate rates to protect Kanjorans from being ripped off. |
| Date | 16:26:39, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | Sorry, I forgot to say, "I oppose." |
| Date | 18:18:03, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | "I am sure this law is what's keeping companies from using nude women to sell products on TV " - if its after 9:30PM, I have no problem with that. "I don't like this because it could lead to too many casinos in one area rather than being nicely spread out as this law would provide" I know that you're from america and because you're so restrictyive over ther,e you don't propoer casinos, but over here in real world (i.e. Europe), Casinos are classy upper class establishments which have formal dress codes, require you to sign up to the membership list, have good music/shows/entertainment, lovely restaurants, lovely people, and NO unwanted or unpleasant people. I'll enver understand what your problems are with casinos. You let people be gay, you let people smoke canibos, but you won't let them gamble? |
| Date | 18:55:45, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | "'I am sure this law is what's keeping companies from using nude women to sell products on TV ' - if its after 9:30PM, I have no problem with that." - You see, that's the thing. They could do this all the time if they feel like it (and they would) because there would be no law saying they can't. "I know that you're from america and because you're so restrictyive over ther,e you don't propoer casinos, but over here in real world (i.e. Europe), Casinos are classy upper class establishments which have formal dress codes, require you to sign up to the membership list, have good music/shows/entertainment, lovely restaurants, lovely people, and NO unwanted or unpleasant people. " Let me take this point by point. "I know that you're from america and because you're so restrictyive over ther,e you don't propoer casinos" - So not restricting casinos magically makes them more proper and refined, but by restricting them they become rundown health hazards full of poor trash...yeah, that makes sense. "but over here in real world (i.e. Europe)," - ?? I didn't realize this world I was living in was just a television show. The grass is all fake, the sky and the buildings are just props. The sun and the stars are just for lighting. The economy is controlled by a computer program along with nature. Boy, I sure wish I could live in a real world like Europe. "Casinos are classy upper class establishments which have formal dress codes, require you to sign up to the membership list, ...., lovely people, and NO unwanted or unpleasant people" - Wow thank g-d you don't let people in wearing raggy clothing or else they might find gambling addictive. And don't even get me started about how great it is that only lovely people are allowed. Otherwise I might have to play a game of poker across from someone unfitting of my majestic beauty. No unwanted people. I can't even imagine what race, religion, or economic status you are calling unwanted nor do I want to pondert that. "I'll enver understand what your problems are with casinos... you won't let them gamble?" - We do let people gamble all they want. We aren't restricting that. We are restricting how many casinos there are for people to gamble in. |
| Date | 20:11:01, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | The phone service deregulation is what we find most digusting here. Phone service is a natural monopoly, and you're paving the way fdor people to be gouged. You also prefer to allow false advertising, to deregulate casinos so they can cheat their customers, and to throw us into deficit with a tax cut on luxuries. We think gambling is fine, but believe in the regulations we have. |
| Date | 22:29:55, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | "We aren't restricting that. We are restricting how many casinos there are for people to gamble" How come you don't restrict cannibas smoking then? "The phone service deregulation is what we find most digusting here" Phone service deregulation means more companies, more competitoon and cheaper prices, obviously you don't agree with the laws of economics, so I'd be wasting my time arguing with you. |
| Date | 22:58:43, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | The company that owns the phone lines has a natural monopoly, that only through regulation can they be forced to either give up (by having to sell phone line use at wholesale prices to competitors) or to keep their prices reasonable. |
| Date | 23:58:20, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | "How come you don't restrict cannibas smoking then?" - It's hard to restrict something when there's no option in the game for me to do so with. It's either for or against unfortunately and frankly I'd rather be for. "obviously you don't agree with the laws of economics" - you have barely shown any knowledge of economics your entire time in this game, so let's keep the name calling to a minimum. Your budgets and income tax proposals don't even fix the deficit and then you still try to cut the luxury tax. You're not for better economic sense, you're for less taxes. That's it. No brains went into that one. |
| Date | 23:59:19, September 25, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | "The company that owns the phone lines has a natural monopoly, that only through regulation can they be forced to either give up (by having to sell phone line use at wholesale prices to competitors) or to keep their prices reasonable." Completely false - in my country, there are three phone lines. |
| Date | 00:00:22, September 26, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | "obviously you don't agree with the laws of economics" - you have barely shown any knowledge of economics your entire time in this game, so let's keep the name calling to a minimum. Your budgets and income tax proposals don't even fix the deficit and then you still try to cut the luxury tax. You're not for better economic sense, you're for less taxes. That's it. No brains went into that one." I'm flattered. LOL! |
| Date | 16:24:35, September 26, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Economics Changes Act 2116 |
| Message | Hurray! - The conservatives win again - our economy is going to boom by the time we're finally done. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 342 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 257 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players are expected to behave in a courteous, co-operative manner and make a reasonable effort to act with the consent of all players involved, even where the rules do not make consent strictly necessary. In particular, players have a responsibility to take reasonable care that other players are not misinformed either about the role-play or the Game Rules. |
| Random quote: "Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime." - Aristotle |