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: Farming Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Blobs
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 2062
Description[?]:
| This bill aims to return Hobrazian farms to the hands of its citizens and relieve the government of the burden of running them. The government will remain in control of staple crops, for example wheat production. The newly privatised farms will have to be under the control of the people who work on them. Those in charge of the running will have to be elected by their fellow workers and allow for the possibility of new elections at any time which would be monitored by an independant body to prevent result fixing. These representatives would have no special privalges except for the ability to spend some of their workings hours off the farm managing the busuiness aspect of it. We are willing to change this to any alternatives that other parties wish for |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: All agricultural operations are state-owned and operated.
Current: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Proposed: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:58:35, May 24, 2005 CET | From |  Socialist Party | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | We would rather see "subsidies to the poor"; though we will vote anyway. No tot his neo-liberal, capitalistic proposal to privatise our national farmland under famrers's control... No to handing the agriculture back into the hands of big buiseness, so that wages of farmars drop while prices of food products rise. No to this attack on our living standard !!!!! |
| Date | 22:16:42, May 24, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | Wow - this must really mean a lot to you considering the number of typos and exclamation marks. Personally we feel that it is better to have the people choose exactly what should be done with farms rather than the government taking control. We understand your fear of big businesses taking over and would be happy to consider suggestions for an additional clause to prevent such events occurring. |
| Date | 03:16:38, May 25, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | Farming becomes a problem for us. We like government and national control of basic foodstuffs as it means we can set prices at low levels in order to provide our people with the minimum of food (bread, meat, etc) that they need at reasonable prices. However, we also accept that government has a tendancy to produce only "needs" not "wants". If it were possible, we would prefer a mixed public/private ideal, with the government owning all farms producing the basics (wheat for bread etc) and allow business to provide those non-essential, but ultimately more satisfying foods. We won't, however, support local government control. Local government tends to be...difficult to control and can be problematic when it comes to national crises. We would prefer National policies if possible. |
| Date | 03:40:55, May 25, 2005 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | We say no to privatization. |
| Date | 17:10:32, May 25, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | We can add a clause that the farming industry must be controlled under worker's control, as to say, the workers on the farms elect their represantatives (there can be permanently re-election held if a significant part of the farmers feels there is a need too). The elected spend a certain time of their hours not on the farm, but representing them, for the same wage per hour. Democraticly organised consumer's organisations do the same, and all these representavices together with some representives off the gouvernement/parliament sit together to discuss and make the policy. "Needs" foods should be primarly produced, but also "wants" should be incorporated, which the consumers' representatives work is. Precides, some of you parties ARE the gouvernement so you can make the necessairy adaptions to the food production process. |
| Date | 18:06:39, May 25, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | I've tried to adapt the proposal to meet the wishes of the Socialists and the WSS - if you want the wording changed we may be able to do so. We also urge the other parties (especially the PPOL) to make their opinions known so that the popularity of this bill can be better judged. |
| Date | 18:05:33, May 27, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | We recommend that there be some form of outside invidulator present at the representative elections to be sure that there is no form of vote rigging going on, apart from that the proposal seems acceptable. |
| Date | 20:25:37, May 28, 2005 CET | From | People's Party of Oppressive Liberation | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | The PPOL has no desire to ennact this change. |
| Date | 23:34:39, June 02, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Farming Act |
| Message | There must be a mis-understanding: Although I see the proposal I said about democraticly control by the workers etc., I never ment this to be coupled with privatisation and throwing it on the free market. Throwing it on the free market might begin with just small farmers and or small farming companies, but capitalism has a tendency within that goods come more and more together in the hands of the few; though it might start small, it will end in big buiseness. That's why I do not fully support the demand for land re-dividing, but rather for really collective ownership. State ownership is that what comes most colest to collective ownership, and as the gourvernement is democraticly elected, this way it is in the hands of the people. (Although I do no think the current elections system is perfect or goes far enough with democratising things). I do support the demand for the democratic workers' control and too that of the independant body for monitoring purposes. Too I believe the subsidising of low-income famrs is the second best alternative, to common property in the form of nationalised agriculture. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 103 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 233 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 29 |
| Random fact: Information about the population of each country can be found on the Population Information thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=8663 |
| Random quote: "The first step in freeing yourself from social restrictions is the realization that there is no such thing as a 'safe' code of conduct, one that would earn everyone's approval. Your actions can always be condemned by someone, for being too bold or too apathetic, for being too conformist or too nonconformist, for being too liberal or too conservative. So it's necessary to decide whose approval is important to you." - Harry Browne |