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: Higher Education Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM)
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: April 2166
Description[?]:
| Universities need more freedom. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The regulation of higher education.
Old value:: The government allows private higher education but regulates it to meet nationally set standards.
Current: The government provides local governments with funding to operate higher educational institutions.
Proposed: The government does not fund any public higher education institutions, permitting only private higher education institutions to exist.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Higher education tuition policy.
Old value:: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Current: The government subsidizes higher education tuition to a certain amount, the rest is covered by the individual students. This includes scholarship programs.
Proposed: The government introduces means tested loans for higher education tuition, to be paid back by students after earnings reach a certain amount.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:51:43, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | And only people with economic resource can have an education? Without the welfare, with the high tax rate, who will afford to get education by private means? The state takes and doesn't give nothing? is that the idea? It's a bad move if a country wants to develop it self, to a nation evolute and move foward some things are needed, capital, efficient and specialized labor, safety, and order and well being society that is extracted from good law's. Without education, there's no specialized labor to improve the economic sectors of the nation, there goes the capital, it makes people unhappy and there goes the well being and order in the society, and with disorder safety goes as well. Against it. |
| Date | 17:55:03, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Conservative-Libertarian Party (UM) | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | This is only higher education. People will still be educated. Universities, however, should not be funded by the government. Yes, loans can be given, but it should not be entirely free. That is ridiculous. |
| Date | 18:00:50, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | We disagree with Article 2 as we believe that too should be wholly private. However this is a step in the right direction so we will support this until a more radical proposal is brought forward. |
| Date | 18:12:42, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | No one is defending progress just survival? Higher education is the key to progress, every major nations are what they are because of higher education, because of specialized labor, scientists, economist's, legislator's, etc. This will kill the progress, and will dive the nation in to primitive society with no hope to a brigther future. |
| Date | 19:45:56, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | Not at all, they will just have to pay for their own education, either from their own resources or through sponsorhip. |
| Date | 19:59:35, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | Who will benefit with specialized labor it's allways the state, it's a most value of the state to have a good education plan that provides a nation specialized labor, so it's more than fair that the government finance the education in exchange of that most value that specialized labor and higher education gives. |
| Date | 20:05:54, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | What need has government for special labour? The government is just a collection of talkers and much overpaid in our view too. If a private company foresees such a need they can of course sponsor some suitable individuals. The government has no place in industry nor will it seek it while we have any sort of control. |
| Date | 20:11:18, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | The private companies that benefit with special labour, will only invest in that nation if there's the special labour, without it investment of the privates will fall, investments from the foreign will not apear, and the government should compete with private companies in some industry like a way to stimulate that area of industry and make profit as well. Like i said special labour is a most value for the nation, it's an atraction to investment and private companies that then will pay tax's, and develop the economy, etc etc. |
| Date | 20:30:53, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | Why do we need theftation? Oh to pay for education so that private companies can pay theftation! We really do hope you can see the circle there. If the private companies want special labour skills they can train it. If they do not they will not! Then we can avoid theftation and allow the worker to keep his / her own earnings rather than stealing them to pay for someone elses education! |
| Date | 20:51:23, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | Tax's function in a base of contribution in exchange of social benefits, everybody contributes to a big cake that is divided by all, those who win most contribute more, it's a rational contribution base, it promotes equality and stability to the society. If a nation has more special labour than other, the foreign investors are gonna prefer to invest in the nation with more special labour. The mesures of your government will not let the worker keep their earnings, and the individual earning is used by the one who gains it, but some things must be for all to use, and those things should be contribute from all. We need a good education and health plan to evolute in a proper nation, if you let the destination of the nation in the hands of each individual no one will get to no where, there will no consense, and theftation will exist along with chaos, disorder, bad politics. |
| Date | 21:12:43, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | Actually if you give an investing company the choice of a deregulated market and 0% theftation or trained labour without any doubt 99.99% will take deregulation and 0% theftation. The only exception would be a monopoly and monopolies are largely against libertarian principles. |
| Date | 21:21:21, January 02, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | We can't tell if that is true, in the days we live, deregulation is not a problem, the problem is to produce the most possible to make profit, and proper labour is most important to production, that generates profit. That statistic is most doubtable in the days we live, to be honest i didn't know positions so radical and different like the libertarian principles. From now on i start believing in everything. We have our opinions and you have your's, there's nothing we can do, i hope we could apply them both, and it would bring much benefit if we could make you see that you shouldn't take so radical decisions. |
| Date | 20:37:21, January 03, 2006 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Higher Education Bill |
| Message | Anytime a Libertarian is willin to put a Survivalist goal before the right to learning or any other party, the basic human understanding of 'are they for the people' goes out the window, the LP TRP and RisR Parties are nothing more then Monoplistic Captilist Fascist that believe the people should bow down to a superor power such as they. We are so appalued at this utter lack of respect to the people that the Libertarian and the others instagate. Wolfs even have more kindness then these guys. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 161 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 132 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The people in your nation don't like inactive parties. When you often abstain from voting for a bill, they will dislike your party and your visibility to the electorate will decrease significantly. Low visibility will means you are likely to lose seats. So keep in mind: voting Yes or No is always better than Abstaining. |
| Random quote: "What luck for the rulers that men do not think." - Adolf Hitler |