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: Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuesday Is Coming
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: November 2125
Description[?]:
| Majoritarianism is just as a bad as any other oppression. A majority has no "divine right" to do anything, no man ever loses his rights simply because he becomes outnumbered. Mob rule must come to an end. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Secondary strike action.
Old value:: Any trade union can go on a sympathy strike in support of other striking workers.
Current: Any trade union can go on a sympathy strike in support of other striking workers.
Proposed: Secondary strike action is illegal. Workers and unions can only go on strike for their own pay and conditions.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Trade union strike ballots.
Old value:: Trade unions are not required by law to hold a ballot before striking.
Current: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, majority approval of those that vote is needed from its members.
Proposed: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, a majority of all members, regardless of if they vote or not must approve the strike action.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:59:01, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I |
| Message | please split the first two from the DWC one. |
| Date | 18:26:06, October 12, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I |
| Message | OK, it's different now. The Greens will consider supporting regulations on secondary strikes and strike ballots -- we are currently undecided on these new proposals, which might go well together in a new bill on strike regulation. We are completely opposed to restrictions on freedom of assembly ("the police may disperse...") |
| Date | 03:46:04, October 13, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I |
| Message | Is that a request to place Article 1 into another bill? |
| Date | 16:50:36, October 13, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I |
| Message | Done, it's down to secondary striking and strike ballots. |
| Date | 22:47:21, October 13, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I |
| Message | Thanks. Still undecided but leaning to the deregulation stance. Why should the government interefere with free markets in this case? |
| Date | 00:33:36, October 14, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Disarming and Disbanding the Mob I |
| Message | We see the laissez faire angle on these issues as this: The government's job in a capitalist system is to prevent the usage of force and fraud(which includes enforcing legal contracts). A union has no right to fail in their part of providing the services they contract to provide(labor). They also have no right to negatively impact their members by forcing them to strike. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 55 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 167 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 78 |
| Random fact: In cases where a party has no seat, the default presumption should be that the party is able to contribute to debates in the legislature due to one of its members winning a seat at a by-election. However, players may collectively improvise arrangements of their own to provide a satisfying explanation for how parties with no seats in the legislature can speak and vote there. |
| Random quote: "Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?" - Thomas Jefferson |