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 Agricultural Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Sunbeam Squad
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: September 3530
Description[?]:
| Diversity and competition in farming must be increased. Monolithic farming operations must be broken up so smaller farms could take its place. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government allows local governments to craft agricultural subsidy policy.
Current: All agricultural operations are state-owned and operated.
Proposed: The government denies subsidy assistance to farmers.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning farm size.
Old value:: Farm size is not regulated.
Current: Farm size is not regulated.
Proposed: Farms that grow too large are broken up and the land redistributed.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:29:57, August 13, 2013 CET | From |  Capitalist Working Families | To | Debating the Bill for Agricultural Reform |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, (1) We STRONGLY support this; OOC: The REASON that we have world hunger is b/c industrialized nations in the U.S., Europe, and Japan, *subsidize* INEFFICIENT Domestic farmers instead of allowing the Free Market to work. In a perfect free market economy w/o any governmental intervention, POOR countries like Mexico would be able to sell cheap Mexican sugar in our markets, but quotas and sugar tariffs are put in place to protect the INEFFICIENT domestic sugar farmers in Louisiana thus making the Mexican sugar ARTIFICIALLY high and locked out of the market. For those that were interested, check out my academic paper that I mailed to the Obama Administration that discusses on how to eliminate Third-World Poverty from a FREE-MARKET capitalist perspective as opposed to "foreign aid." cf. https://www.facebook.com/LiberalOffender/posts/410090242444166?comment_id=2223752&reply_comment_id=2223895&offset=0&total_comments=48#!/notes/christian-savage/how-to-abolish-farm-subsides-for-a-100-free-market-ghana/56477987774 IC: (2) We STRONGLY oppose; farm size should be UN-regulated and attempts to redistribute that land would be a violation of the farmers' private property rights; --The CWFP Spokesman OOC: |
| Date | 22:50:33, August 13, 2013 CET | From | Sunbeam Squad | To | Debating the Bill for Agricultural Reform |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, If farm size were not restricted, small farmers would inevitably sink into oblivion. The maintenance of small farmers have been the primary reason for agricultural subsidies. Amelia Granger SS Leader |
| Date | 02:19:01, August 14, 2013 CET | From | Urban Party of Rutania | To | Debating the Bill for Agricultural Reform |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Land redistribution is a very socialist initiative and for that reason, we cannot support this bill. Marta Wilson UPR Congressional Leader |
| Date | 10:15:08, August 14, 2013 CET | From | Democratic Union | To | Debating the Bill for Agricultural Reform |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, We oppose both articles, but I will explain you why we subsidize farmers. 1. Agriculture produces much less profit for a single person than if he/she worked in an industry or service. That's because a great part of the cost of products is retained by shops and intermediaries. If we didn't subsidize agriculture, all the farmers would left their farms and move to the cities to find a better paid job. If you know a bit of economy, it's easy to see that it would be catastrophic both for the farmers and for the people that were on the cities (more unemployment, worse salaries and more expensive farm products). 2. We push domestic agriculture because we have some restrictions on pesticides and product quality that other countries may not have. If we all bought foreign food and raw materials, we would push down Rutanian economy, and we wouldn't know exactly what we and our children are eating. -- Max Hopkins, DU Food and Agriculture manager |
| Date | 23:15:21, August 14, 2013 CET | From | Capitalist Working Families | To | Debating the Bill for Agricultural Reform |
| Message | "We push domestic agriculture because we have some restrictions on pesticides and product quality that other countries may not have."--MH Dear Mr. Hopkins: If our government were to abolish farm subsidies, it would NOT lead to "higher prices" in agricultural products b/c mostly the THIRD-world countries will supply our supermarkets with CHEAP agricultural crops that they are more EFFICIENT in producing when our domestic farmers are NOT. As to your point about pesticides etc., that can just be alleviated by REQUIRING those standards in any Trade Agreement Rutania has with our foriegn food producers. --The CWFP Spokesman |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 0 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 555 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Parties have the ability to endorse another party's candidate for the Head of State election (if there is one). This adds a strategic element to the elections. |
| Random quote: "Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers which they dare not dismount. And the tigers are getting hungry." - Winston Churchill |