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: Progressive Reform Bill - Arms Industry Innovation
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive 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: July 2176
Description[?]:
| We find that monopolistic state ownership of the arms industry stifles any innovation from competition and the research and development of better weaponry. Not only that, but states with private arms industries can innovate and sell their superior arms to Likatonia and other countries denying our arms industry valuable export markets. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's defence industry.
Old value:: The state owns all defence industries.
Current: The state owns all defence industries.
Proposed: Defence industries are privately owned and not subsidised.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:44:38, January 19, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Progressive Reform Bill - Arms Industry Innovation |
| Message | Private industries have been historically more innovative and effecient than state run ones, so we feel that this is not only good, but essential to provide the most modern defense of our fair land. |
| Date | 21:31:38, January 20, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Progressive Reform Bill - Arms Industry Innovation |
| Message | The AAS opposes. Defence is far too important an issue to be placing in the hands of fair-weather-friends. |
| Date | 21:48:21, January 20, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Progressive Reform Bill - Arms Industry Innovation |
| Message | We support this for sooooooooooo many reasons. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 270 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 192 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 38 |
| Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play. |
| Random quote: "If voting changed anything, they'd abolish it." - Ken Livingstone |