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: Bill for a More Free Economy
Details
Submitted by[?]: Common Sense Conservatives
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: February 3199
Description[?]:
| Freedom is vital to the survival of this nation, our citizens face a government where its overreaching hand extends into their lives and how they make a living. This bill is proposed to kick government out of the economy, stop all subsidizing, and allow more freedom for our great nation. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The banking system.
Old value:: The government operates and owns all banks.
Current: The government operates a central bank and all other banks are private.
Proposed: All banks are privately owned.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Charter school policy (free, privately run, publicly funded schools).
Old value:: Only non-profit organizations may establish charter schools.
Current: Charter schools must be non-profit and have a specific focus.
Proposed: Charter school funding, regulation, and development is left up to local governments.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on subsidising contraception.
Old value:: The government offers free contraceptives in pharmacies and public toilets.
Current: The government offers free contraceptives in pharmacies and public toilets.
Proposed: The government does not supply free or discounted contraceptives.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Energy regulation.
Old value:: Energy is provided by nationalised companies.
Current: Energy is provided by private companies but the prices they can charge are regulated.
Proposed: Energy is provided by private companies which are not subject to any special regulations.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning gated communities.
Old value:: No gated communities are allowed.
Current: No gated communities are allowed.
Proposed: Both the government and the private sector can set up gated communities.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Health care policy.
Old value:: Health care is entirely public and free; private clinics are banned.
Current: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Proposed: Health care is entirely private.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on industry and subsidies to industrial operations.
Old value:: The state owns the commanding heights of the economy and all major industries, but private ownership is allowed in the minor industries.
Current: Certain industries are owned by the state, all others are under private ownership.
Proposed: The government does not intervene in the market nor provide any form of subsidies/relief to industries.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on internet service providers (ISPs).
Old value:: There is a national state-owned internet service provider, but small private ISPs are allowed, which are heavily restricted to ensure that they stay small.
Current: There is a national state-owned internet service provider, but small private ISPs are allowed, which are heavily restricted to ensure that they stay small.
Proposed: Private companies provide internet service throughout the nation, without government interference.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change The government's stance on a salary cap.
Old value:: There is a national maximum wage but local governments may enforce stricter salary caps.
Current: Labour unions and organizations of employers negotiate a salary cap.
Proposed: The government has no stance on a salary cap.
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change The government policy regarding housing.
Old value:: The state owns and maintains all housing.
Current: The state provides public housing to low-income families.
Proposed: All housing is privately-owned.
Article 11
Proposal[?] to change The government's position towards the stock exchange(s).
Old value:: The government owns the stock exchange(s).
Current: Stock exchanges are allowed but are regulated.
Proposed: The government has no position on the proliferation of stock exchanges.
Article 12
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on Democratic Workers' Councils.
Old value:: The government encourages the formation of Democratic Workers' Councils through subsidies and tax exemptions.
Current: The government does not intervene in the marketplace with regards to Democratic Workers' Councils.
Proposed: The government does not intervene in the marketplace with regards to Democratic Workers' Councils.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:59:03, October 16, 2011 CET | From | Sindicato Obrero Libre | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | These are horrible proposals ready to destroy or social state. These proposals will only lead to corporate greed, capitalism and capitalistic tendencies. Banks will exploit and abuse of the system. Private healthcare will neglect the poor and the needy. This isn't what Gaduridos need. |
| Date | 00:16:21, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Common Sense Conservatives | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | First the issue Corporate greed, in a true capitalistic society no matter what the intentions (i.e. greed etc..) you are forced to still raise the standard of living of others. If an owner of a business only wants money and is greedy he is still forced to still provide his service or goods or his business shrinks and he fails, therefore greed will only hurt the owner. If this man decides to exploit his workers, raise prices, etc.. because of that greed then people will stop buying from him and he will fail ( considering that government does stick its heavy hand in it an bails him out which is NOT capitalism). Secondly the banks. If banks that exploit the system will fail because of the competition other banks pose if it mistreats it customers than people will not buy from the and they have 1 of 2 choices fail or innovate/ change their practices. If you dispute this would you buy from a corrupt and bad bank? Finally, when health care is left up to private business they are more efficient and more advanced simply because of competition that is posed like the other arguments. If it neglects the poor and needy than they'll lose money because people will not buy from them. And think of all the free charity clinics there are. If you wanna see exploitation wait till the government is in control because they have NO incinetive to innovate or help. More freedom is what we need. |
| Date | 00:30:54, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Sindicato Obrero Libre | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | A social government of the people, for the people and by the people, has the people as a priority, not making money. In a capitalistic system, business do not care about people, selling their items comes first. That means reducing costs by ie. using cheap labour, using bad quality products etc. Banks are corrupt in the way that they create money that isn't there, and then charge interest, which is again money that doesn't exist. Private healthcare facility neglecting the poor and needy won't lose money, if the poor have no money to spend. A government that let's it's people depend on charity is a horrible government. Further more, charities aren't guaranteed to exist. The small percentage of people that capitalism helps does not warrant the way-more large pro-cent that doesn't "profit" from capitalistic tendencies. |
| Date | 00:49:24, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Common Sense Conservatives | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | The question is does the government truly have the people at heart? You make the argument that business will use cheap labor bad products etc... to reduce prices. First of all isn't making goods cheaper better for the poor and needy as we should all keep at heart? Secondly in a capitalistic society competition between business, yet is not just competition for goods it is also for workers. If a business treats their workers awfully would the workers not conceivably move to another business that has better practices, putting the bad business in a position of, as I've stated before, innovate or fail? And the same argument is applied to using bad quality products would you buy from a business that sold bad quality products? Banks do not create money that isn't their that's something the GOVERNMENT does especially if they controlled the banks. Banks use money that is deposited, withdrew, etc... and if your argument is true for the banks wouldn't the same apply to if the government owned it? Anything private is subject to competition, competition lowers prices making things more affordable for the poor to use the health care system. You are very right in saying that governments who let people depend on charity is awful which is exactly why i oppose the endless welfare programs characteristic of socialism. You also assume nobody will go and create business in this capitalistic society by saying that only few profit. Capitalism gives the ability for people to go out and create business and jobs. In a society of Capitalism everyone profits and is helped, that is the very essence of freedom. |
| Date | 00:50:53, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Common Sense Conservatives | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | With that, even though this bill will not pass, i put this to a vote. |
| Date | 02:44:13, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Gaduridos Congress for Liberty | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | The Gaduridos Congress for Liberty stands behind this bill as good law-making. A social government is a government of the people over every individual; the reality is, we are all better off when we can make our own decisions and determine our own degree of consensual involvement in the affairs of other people. That the Union persists in preventing the people of Gaduridos from doing what is right is only to demonstrate that they do not trust the people - the people who they claim to be defending! |
| Date | 10:04:43, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Sindicato Obrero Libre | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | The people of Gaduridos are the government of Gaduridos, collectively. The collective will of the people is of importance in the social state. Individualistic will in some areas, like business, is limited and regulated to ensure social equality and social justice. Citizens of Gaduridos can still choose to open a non-profit business venture under the government umbrella. |
| Date | 14:30:09, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Common Sense Conservatives | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | That government is best which governs the lest because its people discipline themselves Thomas Jefferson |
| Date | 16:43:45, October 17, 2011 CET | From | Sindicato Obrero Libre | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | Who is this "Thomas Jefferson" that you speak of? Our party has never heard of him |
| Date | 04:31:38, October 18, 2011 CET | From | Common Sense Conservatives | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | A man in some far away world called "Earth" one of the founders of a country called "The United States of America" |
| Date | 04:37:11, October 18, 2011 CET | From | Gaduridos Congress for Liberty | To | Debating the Bill for a More Free Economy |
| Message | The collective will of the people must, by logic, be a minimum of a few, basic and general agreements and these are they: that they can be free to do what they must to support themselves, that they are protected from violence and aggressors both internal and external and that the rule of law is upheld. We can no longer pretend that providing free contraceptives and personal salaries are the kinds of things that can come under the category of the general will of the people. This government has overextended itself, and this bill rightly and timely puts right the very mistake of a government who has become overly active in the wrong areas. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 750 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols. |
| Random quote: "I start with the premise that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers." - Ralph Nader |