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: Defence Act of 2139

Details

Submitted by^[?]: Optimates 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: November 2140

Description^[?]:

The Defense industry needs to be privatized to make it more efficient in times of war.

Proposal^[?] to change The nation's defence industry.

Old value:: The state owns all defence industries.

Current: Defence industries are privately owned and not subsidised.

Proposed: Defence industries are privately owned and not subsidised.

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	21:43:28, November 11, 2005 CET
From	Optimates Party
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	Once again We must see to our own defenses and readiness in case of hostile forces. Since we have no nukes, we must make our conventional forces as efficient as humanly possible. Less bureaucracy,more efficiency.

Date	21:48:55, November 11, 2005 CET
From	Revolutionary Socialist Alliance
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	The Optimates party have given no argument whatsoever as to why privatisation makes this industry 'more efficient'. We're 100% opposed to private profiteers making money from bloodshead.

Date	23:01:33, November 11, 2005 CET
From	Optimates Party
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	The arguement is simple, less government interference/ regulations/ bureacracy = better efficiecy. If companies can be rewarded with profits they will spend more in research for better, more efficient technology. This is basic economic theory. OCC. THis is one of the reasons the old USSR was a Paper Tiger. They looked big, but the government with their different and conflicting priorities made the defence industry a mess. The only way for them to compete with Western (aka NATO) Technology was to steal it. I can't believe the West was frightened of them for so long.

Date	23:04:25, November 11, 2005 CET
From	Optimates Party
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	OCC.Private Profiteers pay the taxes that y'all so much love to spend and give away. Remember the Immprtal anagram from Robert A Heinlein T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L.

Date	23:50:21, November 11, 2005 CET
From	Revolutionary Socialist Alliance
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	Do you believe it's right for a select few to make money off weapons which will be used to maim and kill?

Date	00:25:47, November 12, 2005 CET
From	Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	Its not a question of industry efficiency or regulation, etc (although you have made zero argument to convince anyone. Not that it matters because when someone does make an intelligent argument for deregulation, it gets swept under the carpet). Its a question of trust. Lets say we're buying a series of fighters. Ask yourself the following questions: Would you buy a fighter from a foreign country? Particularly when it is likely such a fighter is less capable than their's and has the possibility of, call it, software "bugs" which make it notoriously difficult to attack certain enemies? Would you give a corporation the ability to build it? Such power could easily be abused for the corporations own gains and with no government oversight, similar software "bugs" could creep into the system thanks to a bit of bribery here and there. By definition, the government is meant to have a monopoly on force. *Would you think it would be best to trust a fighter built by you, programmed by you and not sold to anyone?

Date	22:34:24, November 12, 2005 CET
From	Baltusian Pantian Alliance
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	We helped what is in place now come to be and shall not take it down.

Date	19:03:33, November 13, 2005 CET
From	Optimates Party
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	OCC. THis is how the Defense industry is run in the USA. Private companies give bids to the government for the chance to build said weapon systems, and the government makes the choice on who gets the contract.

Date	21:14:03, November 13, 2005 CET
From	Democratic Socialists
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	nder Baltusian law, no weapons may be exported. Therefore, the only customer is the Baltusian government. If a private company is involved, they will want to make a profit. If they are produced by government organisations, this extra expense is removed. For reasons of efficiency, price, and national security, we oppose.

Date	03:45:29, November 14, 2005 CET
From	Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX
To	Debating the Defence Act of 2139
Message	"OCC. THis is how the Defense industry is run in the USA. Private companies give bids to the government for the chance to build said weapon systems, and the government makes the choice on who gets the contract." OOC: And just imagine what would happen if Lockheed Martin decided it was going to use its F22s to forcefully eliminate the competition and the government.

Vote

Seats

yes

Total Seats: 46

Total Seats: 239

abstain

Total Seats: 48

Random fact: Particracy does not allow role-play that seems to belong to the world of fantasy, science fiction and futuristic speculation.

Random quote: "Presidency, n. The greased pig in the field game of American politics." - Ambrose Bierce

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 71