Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: November 5460
Next month in: 01:59:05
Server time: 10:00:54, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): SocDemDundorfian | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Agricultural Reform

Details

Submitted by[?]: Social-Conservative party

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: January 2166

Description[?]:

The Enclosure movement, once again. History has showed us that to large farms is not efficient, they produce to little, and does not work properly. The Rich world had the enclosure movement that made wonders for the agricultural community. This movement was enforced by the central power, for local governments where to much set in their ways, and to easily persuaded by rich landowners in their constituency. The government, the central power, can look at the well being of the Entire Nation, not just a province like a local government is meant to do. Naturally we shall do this in unity and co-operation with the local governments, but none the less, as our proposal says " Farms that grow too large are broken up and the land redistributed." TOO large, and TOO large is byt he very definition something that is larger then it should be.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date15:07:08, January 01, 2006 CET
FromDaVidan Theological Monarchist Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
Message'The DaVidan Prophets fully agree with this measure and commend our friends the Social-Conservative Party for proposing it. In The Sanctuary, the city of God in which our followers live and work, all agriculture is done collectively and communaly. This is the most effective method. Large farms run by individuals are run purely for profit, where the true purpose of farming is to provide food for Gods children. We support.'

- The Prophet DaVida

Date18:16:50, January 01, 2006 CET
FromRightist Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageThis smacks of socialism and we will oppose this till our dying breath. Land redistribution does not work and neither does spreading wealth.

Date18:20:41, January 01, 2006 CET
FromRedneck Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageWe opose as well. So basically I can work my whole live to make myself have a huge farm and you are going to tell me that I don't deserve it that the lazy neighbor next to me deserves it, I don't think so. We will always oppose bills among these standards. SCP, you shold know that we not rest til we are certain that this bill will not have the slightest chance of surviving in the Council.

Date19:55:29, January 01, 2006 CET
FromSocial-Conservative party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageOOC: Just a quick question, are you in character here or are you really that ignorant of agricultural history and facts ? :)

The Redneck party approves of great Sovchoses, Kolschoses int he old classical Soviet way, huge farms that gives no progress to the society and is insanity out of a economic and productive aspect. We are glad you finally reveiled your color, which is not blue or royal blue, but Red, Soviet Red.

This was a step all western nations took, broke upt he great super-farms, for they proved less efficient. The Soviets did it after their fall, for the great large farms did not work, it was the smaller, more efficient ones, that gave food to the people. Most of the Civilized world has done this movement, as it is now (and it is so in most Undeveloped Countries, Latin America has their Latifundas (those things you can see on Zorro for you who do not know), when a farm goes to large, it is not a matter of stripping land away from a individual, naturally not.

But if a farmer buys all farmland in the country and then just decides to plow one field, for that is enough for him your two parties would approve of that. What we propose is that we would then redistribute, he cannot have so much areas under his own controll , his own very personal controll. He has to arrendate out some of the territory, let farmers move in on other territories to grow crop and produce a surplus, as his workers. And so forth. For your two parties everything that is good for society you bransch as bad, everything that is bad, you say is a praise. For change is above all nothing you two desires.

Date20:01:57, January 01, 2006 CET
FromPatriot Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageWe concur with both the Rightist Party and the Redneck Party. We will not support this measure. Why should we condone redistribution to those that do not deserve it? They didn't work their butts off so they are not entitled to it.

Date20:29:19, January 01, 2006 CET
FromRedneck Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageOkay SCP hold on one minute here. Let me do some defintions here for you.

Kolschoses is actually kolchoses, which roughly means collectively-owned farms .

Sovchoses are state owned farms.

Neither of which this bill would change or support. All this bill would do is create a system of people not trusting the government because one day everything that I worked hard for would be taken away and given to people who doesn't deserve it. People who did not work with their own sweat and blood to earn each and every inch of the land they are on. That is why we support this bill. That is taking away from the rights of the people.


Date20:35:40, January 01, 2006 CET
FromRedneck Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageOppose Not Support. Sorry about that.

Date04:05:47, January 03, 2006 CET
FromPatriot Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
Messageas promised, we vote no.

Date06:39:05, January 03, 2006 CET
FromFreedom Party
ToDebating the Agricultural Reform
MessageMonopolies are allocatively inefficient. We vote yes in favour of higher competition rather than monopolies.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
   

Total Seats: 117

no
  

Total Seats: 91

abstain
   

Total Seats: 91


Random fact: Real-life quotations may be used in Particracy, but the real-life speaker or author should always be referenced in an OOC (out-of-character) note alongside the quotation.

Random quote: "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made" - Otto von Bismark

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 75