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: Foreign Aid Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Revolutionary Socialist Alliance
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: May 2180
Description[?]:
| Let us forge international relationships and, more impoartantly, helping out those in squalour by upping our aid levels. We can afford it. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards giving aid to foreign countries.
Old value:: The government gives moderate aid to countries in need.
Current: The government gives high levels of aid to countries in need.
Proposed: The government gives high levels of aid to countries in need.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:19:17, January 30, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | "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." This Bill would hardly be 'insisting' we make them poor. Don't know where that came from. Time to put money where mouths are. |
| Date | 11:55:45, January 31, 2006 CET | From |  Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | Time to put a proposal to a bill perhaps? Otherwise its all just posturing. Simple elimination of agricultural subsidies would benefit far more than giving aid. Not to mention it'd be cheaper. Give a man fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life. |
| Date | 18:00:35, January 31, 2006 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | Sorry, forgot proposal. Not everything is about expense. |
| Date | 22:01:12, January 31, 2006 CET | From | National Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | "Give a man fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life." What does that have to do with this? Perhaps we should decide what aid should be spent on. Simply sending food is not beneficial, yes, but building schools and infrastructure for the same, or greater price is worth it. |
| Date | 23:44:40, January 31, 2006 CET | From | Fatherland Party | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | This is damn stupid and expensive proposal. You just feed them and they will breed more, then they require even more food and I suppose you think we should then feed bigger population also? It's an endless circle if you give them what they want instead encouraging them to do it themselves. If they can't get over their problems with our already generous aid then they are not fit to live. |
| Date | 04:34:50, February 01, 2006 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | "What does that have to do with this? Perhaps we should decide what aid should be spent on. Simply sending food is not beneficial, yes, but building schools and infrastructure for the same, or greater price is worth it." My point was that working for one's self is inherently more beneficial than relying on receiving aid. Otherwise, I would agree with you, generally. The issues facing most underdeveloped nations' lack of economic growth is the stability of the regime, a lack of infrastructure and an unfair trading field. Firstly, instability is not good for investor confidence and is the key issue. Why would you waste your money on building a factory in a country where it'll be destroyed in the next democratic coup or civil war when you can build one in a neighbouring country with an iron fisted dictator who's regime may last quite a while yet? This is not to say that all dictatorships are beneficial, I'm merely making a point about that any stable government could be beneficial in this way. Secondly, with a lack of infrastructure (i.e. seaports, airports, roads, rail, electricity, telecommunications and a supply of water) then no investor can build anything useful in the nation. A factory, for instance, needs roads to transport in supplies and take away merchandise, needs electricity to run, etc. Without these things, then there can be no investment. Thirdly, a level trading field (e.g. all developed nations ending agricultural subsidies) will allow underdeveloped products to compete more effectively. They are poor because they have no money and what money they do have cannot be afforded to be invested in protectionism. Developed nations have cash to waste and they do, which means their products can sell at artificially deflated price on the market, undercutting the developed nations and preventing growth. Health and education systems are exceedingly important in the long run but for initial industrialisation are nigh-on irrelevant. Because health is too expensive to run and education is not useful for a sweat shop worker, the investments need to be made first, encouraging growth and an increase in wages, which will allow for the creation of a disposable income/tax base with which to create a public education and health system. Will aid directly to the governments help? Probably not. Will aid to NGOs help? Probably. I understand Terra Vision, for example, spends its money on improving local infrastructure infrastructure. If there is a stipulation in this bill (OOC: I mean put something to the effect in the bill description) that aid money will go more to NGOs than tin pot democracies/dictatorships, then we will probably back this. "This is damn stupid and expensive proposal. You just feed them and they will breed more, then they require even more food and I suppose you think we should then feed bigger population also? It's an endless circle if you give them what they want instead encouraging them to do it themselves. If they can't get over their problems with our already generous aid then they are not fit to live." This is a very simplistic view of world affairs and shows your ignorance. Overpopulation is not the primary problem in third world nations. Mismanagement, as it does in many things, causes nearly all of the problems. |
| Date | 00:01:14, February 02, 2006 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | Overpopulation is the problem LLP humanity is supposed to live in harmony with the environment not domineer it. |
| Date | 00:58:02, February 02, 2006 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | "Overpopulation is the problem LLP humanity is supposed to live in harmony with the environment not domineer it." The carrying capacity of Terra has no scientifically determined number attached to it, so what do you base your claim on? Overuse and misuse of resources are the biggest problem. However, sustainable development, a growing industry, will soon ensure that the resources used will go down while the amount of produce goes up, without a blip in our standard of living. I think the coming pollution crisis poses a far greater threat to humans and the environment than a potential resource crisis. As for harmony with the environment, what hippie crap. |
| Date | 05:56:43, February 02, 2006 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Foreign Aid Bill |
| Message | Yes but hippies want to get to that end by spreading love and joy we are more for the exclusion of those who dont agree with us. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 223 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 128 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When forming a cabinet, try to include as few parties as possible, while still obtaining a majority of the seats. |
| Random quote: "Politics have no relation to morals." - Niccolo Machiavelli |