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: Social Mobility Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Anarcho-Primitivist Concern
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: May 2958
Description[?]:
| The government shall establish policies to encourage granting university places and hiring opportunities to those who come from families which have an established record of performing low status, badly paid jobs. The aim of this is to ensure that people from poorer or remoter areas have the same chances as anybody else. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Positive discrimination.
Old value:: No form of positive discrimination is permitted.
Current: The government sets compulsory quotas for hiring women, minorities and marginalized groups.
Proposed: The government encourages positive discrimination and enforces it for government hiring.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:00:00, June 21, 2010 CET | From |  Marxist-Leninist Party of Ikradon (LL) | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | We will not stand for reverse prejudice. |
| Date | 00:35:48, June 21, 2010 CET | From | Union Socialism Alliance | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | They already do have the same chances, and right here you are forcing them to get hired, thus giving them better chances, unfairly to all the others. We shall not support this. |
| Date | 00:36:56, June 21, 2010 CET | From | Anarcho-Primitivist Concern | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | Why? Positive discrimination would be an excellent way to raise the aspirations of the poor and alienated. It's a fairly standard communist means for helping the poor. |
| Date | 00:40:48, June 21, 2010 CET | From | Anarcho-Primitivist Concern | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | We are not suggesting forcing them to get hired. Merely that background is taken into account in the hiring process. This is fair, really. Say we have two candidates for a graduate position: they are both equally qualified, but one is the child of a long line of professional, educated people, whereas the other one is the first to achieve an education in their family. The latter has already had to overcome more challenges than the latter, and this should be recognised as a factor in deciding who gets the position. |
| Date | 00:52:42, June 21, 2010 CET | From | Union Socialism Alliance | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | Fair enough, as long as nothing is forced, we can support. |
| Date | 00:53:52, June 22, 2010 CET | From | Union Socialism Alliance | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | We ask why both the SLD and the FFP are voting no on this bill. |
| Date | 01:13:47, June 22, 2010 CET | From | Marxist-Leninist Party of Ikradon (LL) | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | We will vote aye, but only on a split vote in are party. |
| Date | 16:56:50, June 22, 2010 CET | From | Art & Labour | To | Debating the Social Mobility Bill |
| Message | We are voting no because there is no such thing as "positive" discrimination. Any type of discrimination is by necessity negative, and for the government to enforce discriminatory practices is totally wrong. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 353 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 321 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 76 |
| Random fact: The people in your nation don't like inactive parties. When you often abstain from voting for a bill, they will dislike your party and your visibility to the electorate will decrease significantly. Low visibility will means you are likely to lose seats. So keep in mind: voting Yes or No is always better than Abstaining. |
| Random quote: "Politics is the art of the possible." - Otto von Bismarck |