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: Economical Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: League of Justice
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: September 3455
Description[?]:
| Retsforbundet calls for a broad agreement concerning our economical policy. Everything is up for discussion. We would like to encourage all parties to participate in the discussion since Retsforbundet is aiming for a broad agreement and this is not possible if other parties won't participate in the discussion and lastly support the bill. Deadline: 22:00 (London time), March 14th. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The banking system.
Old value:: All banks are privately owned.
Current: The government operates a central bank and all other banks are private.
Proposed: The government operates a central bank and all other banks are private.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 25
Current: 25
Proposed: 26
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards daily working hours.
Old value:: Daily working hours are regulated by the government.
Current: The government obligates trade unions and employers to negotiate the daily number of working hours.
Proposed: The government obligates trade unions and employers to negotiate the daily number of working hours.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Energy regulation.
Old value:: Energy provision is left to local governments.
Current: Energy is provided by nationalised companies.
Proposed: Energy is provided by nationalised companies.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government allows local governments to craft agricultural subsidy policy.
Current: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Proposed: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards fireworks.
Old value:: Only professionals may run licensed fireworks shows, fireworks are illegal to the general public.
Current: The sale of fireworks is unregulated, anyone may buy them.
Proposed: Professionals may run licensed fireworks shows, small fireworks are legal to the general public.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on nuclear power.
Old value:: The government does not take any position on nuclear power.
Current: The government requires most energy to be generated by nuclear power.
Proposed: The decision is left up to local governments.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning the use of pesticides.
Old value:: Local governments may choose to regulate pesticides certification programs.
Current: The government approves and regulates agricultural chemical use.
Proposed: The government approves and regulates agricultural chemical use.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning private cars.
Old value:: There are no regulations on the ownership of private cars.
Current: Private cars are not allowed.
Proposed: Private cars are allowed, but people are encouraged to travel collective and tax incentives are provided for cars using environmentally friendly fuels.
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change The professional retirement age.
Old value:: 60
Current: 60
Proposed: 61
Article 11
Proposal[?] to change Waste disposal responsibility.
Old value:: It is the responsibility of local governments to decide on waste disposal regulation.
Current: The government is responsible for waste disposal.
Proposed: The government is responsible for waste disposal.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:48:54, March 13, 2013 CET | From |  De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We are opposed to increasing the retirement age, private ownership of the energy sector, free investment of foreign companies in the economy, abolishing the salary cap, liberalising the telephone sector, allowing children to access pornography, getting rid of subsidies for democratic workers' cooperatives, and denying subsidies to farmers. Consequently we must vote against this bill which is almost identical to Retsforbundet's previous proposal. We suggest they propose the environmental measures separately as these are the only ones with broad support. |
| Date | 14:25:24, March 13, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | The retirement age must be increased since our elder population will rapidly expand in the future and due to our very low unemployment, but we can however make a compromise and only raise it to 61 years? The local governments decide at the moment wether or not the energy shall be provided by public or private companies, this proposal will make the same rules for all local governments and regulate the energy prices, we hope you will agree upon this, but we can remove it from the bill if we can not agree upon it. Retsforbundet believe in an open market and therefore also in free investments in the national companies regardless if it is foreign investments or not, but we do see it problematic for you to agree upon this since you are a socialist party, we can therefore remove this from the bill. There should not be a salary cap, no one shall decide how much the maximum wage shall be, we hope you will make a compromise where you will concede to this proposal and we will concede to one key issue of yours, just tell me what that issue will be. We have to give children access to pornography since they can find it everywhere on the internet. The existing law is problematic because it makes sales assistants who sell children porn magazines criminals even though it is possible for children to watch porn online and it is impossible to stop that. Allowing children to buy porn will also bring more money in the national coffers. We are eagerly waiting to a further discussion about this. We can remove article 12 from the bill. Retsforbundet is ready to make a compromise regarding article 19 and propose this instead "Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized." can De venstregrønne accept this? You can in the description read that we are open to discuss all aspects of this proposal and therefore hope to come to an agreement and we do hope that you are open of coming to an agreement upon our economical situation. |
| Date | 14:35:27, March 13, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We feel there is too much here to compromise on and would prefer to vote just on the environmental measures (plus farm subsidies being provided for crops "which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state). The pension age was already just increased by 10 years recently so we feel it doesn't need to rise again at the moment. We also are not prepared to see the salary cap abolished and will not compromise on laws relating to the availability of pornography. With regards to energy regulation we agree it should be standardised but think this should be done through one nationalised company. |
| Date | 15:33:33, March 13, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Kazulia's average unemployment rate is approximately 3,4% and this is a very low number, which indicates that we need to increase the retirement age so that we can accumulate more wealth and welfare to Kazulia. We agree upon a compromise of increasing the retirement age with just one year, we do hope that De venstregrønne will give in on this issue. Why should there be a salary cap, what good comes out of it? - We will give De venstregrønne a concession on one of your key issues, will you not agree upon that? We can accept a removal of article 11. We can accept changing article 5 to "Energy is provided by nationalised companies" if De venstregrønne accepts a removal of the salary cap, is this deal acceptable? |
| Date | 15:34:37, March 13, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Retsforbundet wishes a real broad and long term agreement regarding our nation's economical policy and we hope you do too. |
| Date | 15:48:48, March 13, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | I hope De venstregrønne can agree upon the bill in its present form? |
| Date | 16:45:46, March 13, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | No, we cannot support it unless, at the very least, Retsforbundet takes out the articles on the minimum wage, whaling and the subcontracting of forestry work and implements farm subsidies for ecologically beneficial crops. |
| Date | 16:46:43, March 13, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | In fact we may do what Retsforbundet has done with our own proposal and make a new bill with only the articles we support. |
| Date | 17:07:44, March 13, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | You did not mention that earlier. Retsforbundet strongly disagrees with you regarding the minimum wage, we do not believe that the government shall meddle in the agreements that the labor unions and employer's associations have agreed on, this is not how the Kazulian labour market model should be, it should be government independent. What is wrong about whaling? We can replace article 9 with "There is a national agency which owns and manages all forest land" if you are interested? We forgot to replace article 15, sorry. I will vote no to that proposal, because this bill is aimed to be a long term commitment between a large majority, so that our economy will be stable and grow and we hope De venstregrønne will discuss it with us. Your bill was unnegotiable and that is why we made a counter proposal, we do however want to come to a broad agreement regarding this bill. |
| Date | 22:02:55, March 13, 2013 CET | From | Logisk Synspunkt | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Logisk Synspunkt agrees with the following Articles: 3,4,6,7,8,13 Logisk Synspunkt is on the border with the following Articles, but would prefer to allow local governments to handle the issue: 12,14 |
| Date | 22:22:36, March 13, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | The minimum wage is completely non-negotiable for De venstregrønne and while we prefer wages to be agreed by the unions the state absolutely has to set a minimum level in order to prevent workers from being exploited. We will agree to a national forestry agency although the current law is adequate for us. As for whaling we see no need for it to be permitted and believe it runs contrary to the environmental commitments elsewhere in the bill. |
| Date | 22:40:44, March 13, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Okay we will remove the article concerning the minimum wage and it is nice to see that the article concerning forest managing is agreeable, but we do however not see why whaling non endangered species shouldn't be allowed they are after all just as much an animal as other animals. |
| Date | 09:54:00, March 14, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | If the article on whaling is removed we will vote yes but we are against abolishing the salary cap and increasing the pension age and will try to repeal these changes as soon as we get the opportunity. Allowing whaling will be of little or no economic benefit to Kazulia and we consider it especially cruel considering the size of the animals and the difficulty in killing them. |
| Date | 11:21:13, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | It is a deal then, we will remove the article regarding whaling. |
| Date | 18:57:26, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Liberal Konservative Partiet | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | The KRP takes the following stances on these proposals: 1 - We will support 2 - We will support 3 - We do not agree, Kazulia should preserve it's high standard of living, which includes a long retirement. We actually favour reducing this to 55. 4 - We support 5 - We support 6 - We support 7 - We support 8 - We do not agree, this should be a local matter. 9 - We do not agree, again this should be a local matter. 10 We support 11 - We do not agree, this should be a local matter. 12 - We do not agree, this should be a local matter. 13 - We support 14 - We support 15 - We support 16 - We do not support, we need to keep our energy market flexible and durable. Excluding nuclear energy leaves reliant on unsustainable or underdeveloped energy sources. Broadly, we support, however it would please us if we could negotiate some of the proposals into a separate bill? |
| Date | 19:21:22, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We really need an increase in the retirement age and you can read our arguments about exactly this in comment 2 and 4. We can remove article 8 and 9 from the bill if you would give in on the retirement age, because this is of much importance for Retsforbundet. To ensure a clean and good environment we believe that the state must be responsible for wast disposal and we do hope that you will give in on this issue and we will remove article 12 and change article 16 from what it is to "The decision is left up to local governments", is this agreeable? We would rather not make a separate bill, because we aim this to be a broad and long term agreement between the Kazulian political parties and we hope you would like to be a part of the agreement? |
| Date | 19:27:36, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Liberal Konservative Partiet | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We agree to your changes, we do still take issue with retirement age, however we can propose an amendment later if required. We will support. I understand your arguments in favour of increasing the retirement age, however our position is simple. People work for a long period of their lives, they then reach old age without any ability to enjoy retirement, by the time they reach retirement they have many ailments. What we want to encourage is people saving up for their retirement, so that when they reach retirement age, they are spending money on leisure activities and consumer goods - actually added value to our economy rather than draining it. |
| Date | 19:28:51, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We did not notice Logisk Synspunkt's comment before now, we apologize. Could Logisk Synspunkt be more specific which articles it would/would not support because we can't see how the local governments should take care of genetically modified crops? - And would Logisk Synspunkt support the bill if it was put to a vote? |
| Date | 19:38:51, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Great, we do however need this to be an broad agreement and we will there for not put it to a vote just yet, we will wait for LS and IL until the deadline, which is at 22:00, London time. We do also understand your arguments regarding not increasing the retirement age, but people do get older and we need as many employees as we can and we do therefore believe that an increase of the retirement age would be beneficial for everyone. |
| Date | 19:44:41, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Liberal Konservative Partiet | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | I suppose we will just have to agree to disagree. The KRP support population growth, but we would rather have a workforce that is young and active, with their seniors able to enjoy a long retirement. |
| Date | 19:47:17, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Yes let us do that then. |
| Date | 22:36:58, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Logisk Synspunkt | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | If GM crop policy is allowed to stay the same, chemicals in agriculture are regulated but not banned, and energy is provided by private companies but the prices they can charge are regulated, or a more private option, then Logisk Syspunkt will be willing to vote yes despite disagreeing with a government central bank, increased taxes, and subsidation of environmentally friendly stuff. |
| Date | 22:41:06, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We do want to compromise on that, but does De venstregrønne and KRP want to make a compromise with Logisk Synspunkt regarding these things? |
| Date | 22:46:30, March 14, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | De venstregrønne will have to vote against the bill or abstain on it if the changes proposed by Logisk Synspunkt are made. |
| Date | 22:49:48, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Indigoblå Liga | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | 1 - We see no reason for this change but consider the matter negligible 2-4 - We support 5 - We do not support. Energy should be provided by private companies but the prices they can charge are regulated. 6 & 7 - We support 8 - We do not agree. Although we are concerned for the environment, the government should not subsidize environmental fuels just as it should remain out of as much of the market as it can. 9 - We do not agree. This should remain with local governments. 10 - Both the current and proposed options are acceptable. 11 - We do not agree. This should remain with local governments. 12 & 13 - We do not agree. This will harm our economy and agricultural efficiency. We say the largely the same as LS. Remove 12 and 13 (GM and pesticides) and change 5 (energy regulation) to private companies with price regulation and we will vote yes. Would DVG be willing to accept if the energy sector was nationalized? |
| Date | 22:50:36, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Indigoblå Liga | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | 1 - We see no reason for this change but consider the matter negligible 2-4 - We support 5 - We do not support. Energy should be provided by private companies but the prices they can charge are regulated. 6 & 7 - We support 8 - We do not agree. Although we are concerned for the environment, the government should not subsidize environmental fuels just as it should remain out of as much of the market as it can. 9 - We do not agree. This should remain with local governments. 10 - Both the current and proposed options are acceptable. 11 - We do not agree. This should remain with local governments. 12 & 13 - We do not agree. This will harm our economy and agricultural efficiency. We say the largely the same as LS. Remove 12 and 13 (GM and pesticides) and change 5 (energy regulation) to private companies with price regulation and we will vote yes. Would DVG be willing to accept if the energy sector was nationalized? |
| Date | 22:50:50, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Can De venstregrønne and Logisk Synspunkt accept that only two of the changes by Logisk Synspunkt will come through; "GM crop policy is allowed to stay the same" and "chemicals in agriculture are regulated but not banned"? - This would meen that "Energy is provided by nationalised companies" will still be there. |
| Date | 22:52:55, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Would Indigoblå Liga also accept my previous comment? |
| Date | 22:56:46, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | It is after all some rather perceptible tightening green regulations we are dealing with DVG. |
| Date | 22:57:49, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Indigoblå Liga | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We really only want to nationalize the energy sector if it's necessary to pass this bill which it does not seem like. OOC: Sorry for submitting a comment twice, my computer was being weird. |
| Date | 22:59:36, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Okay would you give in on the other two things then? |
| Date | 23:00:14, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Or wait, would you like to nationalize the energy sector or do you wish that? |
| Date | 23:00:37, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | do you "not*" wish that? |
| Date | 23:01:41, March 14, 2013 CET | From | De venstregrønne | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | The bill can be passed with the support of RF, VG and KRP so we see no need to permit GM crops. We will accept that article being taken out though if the one on the salary cap is also removed. |
| Date | 23:06:35, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We accept that. |
| Date | 23:18:20, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Why does Logisk Synpunkt vote no, you got two of your demands through, was that not enough? |
| Date | 23:34:38, March 14, 2013 CET | From | Indigoblå Liga | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We will vote yes but would like to see the energy sector more privatized in the future. |
| Date | 23:37:53, March 14, 2013 CET | From | League of Justice | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | We would too, but we will first support a privatization after the election, since we believe that this agreement should at least be implemented until the next election period. |
| Date | 21:54:48, March 15, 2013 CET | From | Logisk Synspunkt | To | Debating the Economical Reform |
| Message | Logisk Synspunkt gave forth a compromise that was as far as Logisk Synspunkt was willing to go to make a compromise. If the energy sector had been made private, then Logisk Synspunkt would have voted yes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 185 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 65 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In your Message Centre there is a really useful feature which allows you to subscribe to all of the bill debates in your nation. If you use that, then the "Watched Discussions" section will show you every time a new message has been posted on a bill. You can also subscribe to other pages you want to follow, such as your nation message-board, party organisations or bills outside your nation which you are interested in. |
| Random quote: "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?" - Mahatma Gandhi. |