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: Essential Industry Bill, 2123
Details
Submitted by[?]: Social Dynamist 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: July 2125
Description[?]:
| Presently, when an industry is failing, it is not government policy to intervene. However, should the industry in question be one of vital importance to the nation - from rail transport to electricity to water, massive economic damage could occur, not to mention the possibility of lives being lost. This bill would have the government maintain vital services and protect the public from failures of the market. In order not to diminish the rights of workers in any sectors which might be affected, this bill will also permit government employees to strike (although emergency services must maintain a safe level of coverage). This will also accord to other employees of government the same rights as employees in the private sector. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on industry and subsidies to industrial operations.
Old value:: The government does not intervene in the market nor provide any form of subsidies/relief to industries.
Current: The government acts as an investor of last resort, by nationalizing failing industries that provide vital goods or services.
Proposed: The government acts as an investor of last resort, by nationalizing failing industries that provide vital goods or services.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The workers' right to strike.
Old value:: All workers, except public employees, have the right to strike.
Current: All workers have the right to strike but certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society have to ensure a minimal service.
Proposed: All workers have the right to strike but certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society have to ensure a minimal service.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:07:09, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | Opposed in the strongest terms. We will not become an insurance plan for industries that can't stay afloat. |
| Date | 23:09:47, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | This is an insurance plans for the people of Tukarali. The nationalisation process will not in any way protect the corporations who fail. |
| Date | 16:38:13, October 11, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | Its the nationalism we oppose. We don't believe in nationalizing ANY industries. It reeks of oppression of the free market and we won't tolerate it. Ladies and Gentlemen, it is clear that the Social Dynamist Party here doesn't understand that if you nationalize businesses, you are in fact going to stagnate the economy. Only by having a free market system can we as a nation grow economically. |
| Date | 20:02:16, October 11, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | "Ladies and Gentlemen, it is clear that the Social Dynamist Party here doesn't understand that if you nationalize businesses, you are in fact going to stagnate the economy." If a vital industry collapses, stagnation is the least of the nation's worries. It is clear that the RiP is trying to apply its prejudices without the slightest consideration of context. Nationalisation will only occur if the markets fail and an industry collapses. |
| Date | 20:13:49, October 11, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | There's always someone to pick up the pieces. We will not be sandbagged in this way. We understand full well how the economy works even if the socialists among us don't. Once they nationalize something, they'll never let it go back to the private realm. If they nationalize something then the workers that work there won't be able to strike since they'll be under government control. I guess the Socialists here forgot that public employees can't strike! If they nationalize the industry, that puts it under government control. So which way do you want it? Do you want them to strike or not? |
| Date | 01:36:36, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | "There's always someone to pick up the pieces. " An industry that has already failed is hardly a sound investment, and this bill would only come into effect if no investor can be found: "The government acts as an investor of last resort". We feel it is incredibly naïve to oppose such a failsafe on the irresponsible assumption that someone else will do it for us. "We understand full well how the economy works even if the socialists among us don't." The RiP is quick to take credit when the market works, but we understand full well when it doesn't. "If they nationalize the industry, that puts it under government control. So which way do you want it? Do you want them to strike or not?" If you're trying to highlight a contradiction, please remember that the SDP also favours an end to the currently policy of arresting public employees for striking. We've not forgotten - have you? Otherwise, we're quite curious as to where the RiP is going with this. |
| Date | 01:53:36, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | Nationalized Business=Public Workers=Unable to strike. You support business strikes but if you nationalize the business, you have, in essence, taking away their right to strike. You can't have it both ways. This bill is contradictory to your aims with the law the way it is now. |
| Date | 02:22:33, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | SDP, we agree with you. However, we will not vote in favour of this bill until *after* the government employees are permitted to strike. This is because both sides make good points and a "failsafe" is a good idea, but the people should be free to strike. |
| Date | 02:47:40, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | The RiP and FP present convincing arguments for the interdependence of these measures, and so we have amended the bill accordingly. |
| Date | 05:22:14, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | Okay, now we'll support it. |
| Date | 18:42:05, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | We still oppose this bill. We will not support Article 1 for what we have already stated before and we sure as hell won't support Article 2. Public Employees should not be allowed to strike and we will see to it that they don't. |
| Date | 20:54:51, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | We'll oppose this measure. |
| Date | 23:55:55, October 13, 2005 CET | From | United Farmers of Tukarali | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | It is essential that there be no interruption in the provision of certain services - such as rail transport, electricity, etc. - to allow other businesses, especially agricultural businesses, to continue their own activities. We agree that the free market always works itself out in the long run, but we must also be concerned about the short run. We will vote yes, but we would prefer to see an amendment added that any nationalization is a temporary measure only, and the industry will be resold after a limited amount of time. |
| Date | 02:09:32, October 14, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Essential Industry Bill, 2123 |
| Message | The Tribal Council has Rejected this Bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 100 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 199 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The voters enjoy active parties who take upon themselves the initiative to create laws. |
| Random quote: "The 20th century has been characterised by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda against democracy." - Alex Carey |