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: Inherence Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Neo Nationalist Party (NNP)
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 4083
Description[?]:
| There is no reason the government should be able to tell people what they can and can't get from there late relatives if there will says that it was given to that person. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on inheritance
Old value:: There is a regulated inheritance law, private regulation of inheritance is allowed but also regulated.
Current: There is a strictly regulated inheritance law, private regulation is not allowed.
Proposed: There are no regulated inheritance laws, inheritance is only regulated by the will of deceased.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:12:22, August 30, 2016 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | Abolishing inheritance is the quickest way to promote and entrench inequality. Why should people be entitled to huge, unregulated sums of money just based on happening to be born to the parents they were born to? |
| Date | 14:51:39, August 30, 2016 CET | From | The Conservative Independence Party | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | Say I have a clock my son loves it. Why should I be prevented from giving my clock to him after I die? Why should he have to go through tough regulation laws to get an heir loom? He shouldn't. |
| Date | 16:20:36, August 30, 2016 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | Why would the government seek to regulate your leaving a clock to your son? As the Labour Party Speaker pointed out, the only inheritance we are interested in regulating is the inheritance which automatically secures generational prosperity, where one person works so that his or her great grandchildren children never have to work. Those who do not work do not pay taxes, and inequality is entrenched. But- if I want to leave a toothbrush to my kid, I can't see what regulation would ever happen over that heirloom. |
| Date | 16:21:02, August 30, 2016 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | Once again, this is a solution without a real problem. The current law is fine. |
| Date | 18:52:50, August 30, 2016 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | We're willing to compromise here, if the CIP proposes the 'De-Regulation of Leaving Clocks in a Will Act 4082' we'll support. |
| Date | 00:54:37, August 31, 2016 CET | From | Libertarian Democrats of Kalistan | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | Fundamentally, inheritance tax is the taxation of money that has already been taxed - and that does not seem very fair. However, the Libertarians recognise the SPoK's point about wealth inequality.. We are for inheritance tax but would propose a reformation of the system. Much like the CIP, we do not see it to be fair if someone wishes to pass on sentimental family heirlooms or even a family home - the current law is fine, provided we see a slight reform to what can be taken by the government. |
| Date | 01:09:35, August 31, 2016 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | The current law applies only to money as we understand it. Perhaps property too but in the absence of clarification, we would assume not. |
| Date | 05:21:57, August 31, 2016 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | The taxation of money which has already been taxed does not seem fair? Let me provide a counter to this. If I earn money, my earnings are taxed under income tax. That's fine. If I spend that money on a boat, I am charged for my purchase under the luxury tax. Double tax. We do not hear anyone critiquing that. Only when someone else obtains a mountain of money that they didn't actually earn. The money is not being taxed twice. The obtaining of it is. One person pays the tax when they earn it, and the person that inherits it pays tax when they earn it. It is the earning of the money which is being taxed, and each time this money accrues to a new person, the tax is paid. |
| Date | 05:23:56, August 31, 2016 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Inherence Reform |
| Message | For the record- simple possessions are not taxed. It is only substantial sums of money which are taxed. I, as Premier of the Republic, would not make enough money to ever be taxed. Neither would any successful small business owner. It is only the super wealthy who even experience this tax. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 283 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 349 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 118 |
| Random fact: After 3 days (72 hours) your account will be inactivated by Moderation. If you want to be reactivated you can request reactivation located here: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4360 |
| Random quote: "We must show that liberty is not merely one particular value but that it is the source and condition of most moral values. What a free society offers to the individual is much more than what he would be able to do if only he were free. We can therefore not fully appreciate the value of freedom until we know how a society of free men as a whole differs from one in which unfreedom prevails." - Friedrich August Hayek |