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: Housing Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Revolutionary Socialist Alliance
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: January 2178
Description[?]:
| This Bill will ensure that standards are made in housing for those on low incomes. We recognise that low-income families are entitled to dignity as much as the rest of those in society, and therefore government housing will be built to a high standard with reasonable rent rates. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government policy regarding housing.
Old value:: All housing is private but rent is subsidised for low-income households.
Current: The state provides public housing to low-income families.
Proposed: The state provides public housing to low-income families.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:45:37, January 26, 2006 CET | From | Libertad y Justicia | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | My question for you is this: at whose expense? |
| Date | 18:51:21, January 26, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | At the expense of private profiteers, naturally. |
| Date | 19:09:11, January 26, 2006 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | Before you try and bring Baltusia to the state of a backwards backwater nation i would like to state that the HN had special camps for people like you mr communist. |
| Date | 20:20:45, January 26, 2006 CET | From | Libertad y Justicia | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | "At the expense of private profiteers, naturally." So, slave labor? |
| Date | 22:43:39, January 26, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | That doesn't even make sense. How does taking house building away from private companies constitute slave labour? |
| Date | 00:46:40, January 27, 2006 CET | From | Fatherland Party | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | Private companies do the job always better. We will vote no. |
| Date | 04:47:35, January 27, 2006 CET | From |  Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | What if the low-income family doesn't want to move to the *rolls eyes* shiny, new government houses? Are you going to strip them of their rent subsidies? If not, how do you plan on paying for this? What about the people who bought their homes through their own hard work? Are you just going to tell them, "I'm sorry but some poor people who already have a decent standard of living need this place much more than you do, so the government is going to steal it from you. Don't like it? Too bad."? And of course when the government housing moves into a nice area, which you seem to be suggesting, then the local real estate prices will collapse, the non-poor people will move somewhere else and we'll back to square one, except in a much worse state because you've robbed non-poor people (which does not equate to rich) and forced the poor to live where you tell them. Yay for socialism! |
| Date | 07:05:41, January 27, 2006 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | It al makes sense now why do any work at all? when the government makes us all equal we shall ride the backs of everyone else to a set standard of living with no labour involved. Lazy damned Communism. |
| Date | 23:40:16, January 28, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | Again mass hysterics that arise from a LibLib government who are nothing short of incompetant. Low income families are often happy for housing in times of trouble, so this equips them perfectly - remember Marx's teaching for need rather than want. How do we plan on paying for this? Easy, by spending the surpluses the government has rather than to just let it sit as your party have done for several years. Yes, yay for socialism - WITH FIXED MARKET PRICES. |
| Date | 00:58:02, January 29, 2006 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | "Low income families are often happy for housing in times of trouble, so this equips them perfectly " This doesn;t make any sense. "remember Marx's teaching for need rather than want." So you can decide what someone needs better than themselves? "How do we plan on paying for this? Easy, by spending the surpluses the government has rather than to just let it sit as your party have done for several years." You can have it, when you can take government. "Yes, yay for socialism - WITH FIXED MARKET PRICES." Yay for an economy that promotes shortages of resources? |
| Date | 17:42:28, January 29, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | "This doesn;t make any sense." Neither to LibLib Bills. WAYHAY! Let me think, born into poverty, leave school, get a job...one problem. No housing. This solves these problems. "So you can decide what someone needs better than themselves?" I'd prefer four people living in a three bedroom semi-detached than tow people on rent subsidies, wouldn't you? "You can have it, when you can take government." If this Bill passes, you'd have to spend it. It's Baltusia's money to be spent on legislation and making a difference, not just to lie there unused. And you complain about nothing to do but antiacts... "Yay for an economy that promotes shortages of resources?" Bollocks, proofless, slurs. |
| Date | 01:11:51, January 30, 2006 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Housing Act |
| Message | "Let me think, born into poverty, leave school, get a job...one problem. No housing. This solves these problems." This bill will only achieve three things: forcing people to live where you tell them; moving poor people from their current homes, which they chose for themselves, into government housing, which simply shifts the poverty to a new area; stealing land from people who worked for it. And if you really think there's a housing crisis in Baltusia, you truly have lost touch with reality. "I'd prefer four people living in a three bedroom semi-detached than two people on rent subsidies, wouldn't you?" No, I'd probably prefer to live with my partner in a place of our choosing, using rent subsidies to help pay the bills. The question is extremely subjective and requires a personal choice. Socialism does not allow for personal choice while capitalism does, hence its advantage because people can decide for themselves instead of relying on Big Sister Repbulica to make good decisions. "If this Bill passes, you'd have to spend it. It's Baltusia's money to be spent on legislation and making a difference, not just to lie there unused." There are a large number of competing demands on the Senate and if we don't get around to stealing people's homes right away, I'm sure most people will understand, especially since there is no need for this bill nor is there a housing crisis in Baltusia that needs solving. Besides, that relies on this bill passing, an unlikely prospect. The budget surplus is partially being saved for a rainy day (probably something similar to the 2136 Big Recession) and partially being sent in foreign aid to level out the agricultural trading field for farmers of poor nations, since you insist on making them poor. There are people outside of Baltusia who aren't lucky enough to be Baltusian but nonetheless deserve our help. "And you complain about nothing to do but antiacts." Furthermore, we haven't antiacted in a while because we are glad at a revitalisation of the Senate. "Bollocks, proofless, slurs." To fix market prices is to remove the primary indication of demand of a good or resource. The decisions on what has the highest demand has to be made by a government department, which knowing bureaucracy, would take twenty-one working days to respond to any economic stimulus. When government departments make mistakes, shortages and/or surpluses are created or can you promise that your command economy would never, ever make any mistakes? Its simple economics backed by logical proof, unless you can prove yourselves to be superhuman... |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 125 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 184 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 52 |
| Random fact: In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity. |
| Random quote: "Plans to protect air and water, wilderness and wildlife are in fact plans to protect man." - Stewart Udall |