Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: November 5573
Next month in: 00:53:22
Server time: 03:06:37, November 25, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): AltonMan2 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Budget proposal of June 2120

Details

Submitted by[?]: Radical Greens

Status[?]: defeated

Votes: This bill proposes to change the allocation of funds in the budget. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.

Voting deadline: December 2122

Description[?]:

The Progressive Greens propose to adjust the government's spending budget to better address the economic and social situation of the Kundrati Union.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date17:13:24, October 04, 2005 CET
FromFree Market Party
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
MessageOOC: Was this bill created anew? All the messages are gone. Also, why is it that anybody can propose a budget? I thought only the Minister of Finance could do that.

IC: As we have already said, this bill will reduce our defense spending by nearly 80%. This is an absurd budget cut. It will not just limit the growth of the military, it will destroy the military. Many of our current weapon systems are expensive to maintain. If this budget proposal passes, we will be forced to dispose of many of these systems. Our military will be starved to death by a lack of funding.

We are not a member of any well-organized defense alliance. We must be able to defend ourselves. This bill destroys our ability to do so.

In addition, we notice that this bill increases our total budget. We do not wish to see the budget increased, but if we are to increase spending then we certainly should not cut defense spending by 80%. This bill is simply irrisponsible, and we cannot support it.

Date19:45:48, October 04, 2005 CET
FromRadical Greens
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
MessageOOC: Yeah didn't know how to change it without creating again. It has on;y been implemented in the game and everyone can use to test it for the time being.

Date23:52:24, October 04, 2005 CET
FromUnio enim si quis Motus Populi
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
MessageIt's still in the test phase, so it has no affect on anything yet, which is why any one can propose a spending bill, so we can test it out.

Date02:53:30, October 06, 2005 CET
FromParty of Evil
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
MessageShift cash from Foreign Affairs to Defence and we'll support this.

Date06:04:08, October 06, 2005 CET
FromRadical Greens
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
Messageforeign affairs also means aid so therefore believe it should stay as is

Date23:51:48, October 07, 2005 CET
FromAlderdath Lebrali Demkratti
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
Messagei can't support this as I can't accept that the HoG should get more than the department of defence

Date02:06:56, October 08, 2005 CET
FromUnio enim si quis Motus Populi
ToDebating the Budget proposal of June 2120
Messagethe LibDems have a good point.

(eh, it doesn't affect anything yet, so I don't feel as bad rejecting this at the current time)

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
 

Total Seats: 27

no
     

Total Seats: 244

abstain
 

Total Seats: 34


Random fact: Head to the "Language assistance" thread to receive and offer help with translations: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6368

Random quote: "If you're not turned on to politics, politics will turn on you." - Ralph Nader

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 66