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: Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182
Details
Submitted by[?]: Mouvement des Conservateurs
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: December 2183
Description[?]:
| Colleagues The NCC proposes a College Grant Reform Act containing. For a while new Rildanor has been a haven for students, the educational system is completely pulbic and free, expenses payed by the government. But does that 'good-life-climate' implies on the quality or the educational degree of our students? Not that much. However many of our pupils finish school at the age of 18, less of them graduate high school or at the university. The cause of this lies at the stimulation of these students, because the government pays all the costs for schoolmaterial & -enrolment, students have no stimulation as what so every because they know they can change branches and schools without any extra costs or knowing it might be the only change they have, most of them even stop earlier without any graduates and go to work. Article 1 & 3: At the age of 18 pupils in general have reached an age they can be called 'ready to enter the labor market', in order to respect that we must give them the opportunity or better the choice: 'to study on or go to work'. By that we get younger people on the labor market and give them the liberty to 'become adult' on a younger age - as a cutback this is in favor of both the government and parents with children. Article 2: This article implies the stimulation of the students, as the government will keep on subsidizing tuitions, the student will have to provide a certain amount itself. Knowing that what they payed for it and obviously doesn't want to do that again will stimulate them to succeed their studies, consider their choice before they start and will be able to graduate on a younger age. The scholarship program will remain and I will revisit this issue later. College grants (revisited): When the economic system will be implemented I would like to propose a scholar program fund. It is quite simple, as students will have to pay for tuition at higher education facilities, this might become a problem for some of them. (low-income families, handicap, ...) So they can apply for a scholarship program by the government. These students will have to fill out a form containing further information about the family's income or any other shortcomings that might prevent them from earning study money. When they got accepted, the government will fully pay they study costs. This possibility also applies on the so called 'smart students', pupils who had exeptional results at secondary school or done something special for their local community. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The age until which students, if education were to be compulsary, are required to be educated (limited between 16 and 21).
Old value:: 21
Current: 18
Proposed: 18
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Higher education tuition policy.
Old value:: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Current: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Proposed: The government does not subsidize tuition, students must pay for higher education themselves. This does not include scholarship programs.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The age at which a person is considered an adult (limited between 12 and 24).
Old value:: 21
Current: 18
Proposed: 18
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:58:42, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Devout Ecologists Party | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | Where do you base the paragraph "However many of our pupils... and go to work" on? You are assuming something out of thin air. I could do the same and say: "All of our pupils love to study, because they have a great stimulus to study. This is because the quality of the education and teachers is so high due to the effort and expenses put in it. Almost all graduate and continue to study even after the age of 21.". Now what really is false is saying: "However many of our pupils finish school at the age of 18", since none do finish school at that age. Compulsory education until 21 makes sure of that. Besides, why is 18 the "magic number" here? And, if you would make students pay for tuition while they have no money themselves then you would force them to work. And students don't have money, since they didn't have jobs due to school. So you are asking the students to combine work and school, and this would assuredly mean that less time is spent towards school. |
| Date | 11:08:57, February 09, 2006 CET | From |  Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | Why would 21be the "magic number"? An society develops, so is every generation, they each increase their capability and competence, if a government isn't willing to 'adapt' its policy to that, this social area would stagnate. If we lower the compulsory age to 18, the secundary education system wouldn't be obligated to 'create' 3 extra years or higher school wouldn't be obligated to keep students for 3 years. If a pupil reaches the age of 18 they earn the liberty to make a choice, become active on the labor market or study, in order to study on a higher level they must be stimulated a certain about their choice - thats what I mentioned in my scholarship program (let me correct article 2 - I took a wrong proposal, sorry for that) --> College grants (revisited): When the economic system will be implemented I would like to propose a scholar program fund. It is quite simple, as students will have to pay for tuition at higher education facilities, this might become a problem for some of them. (low-income families, handicap, ...) So they can apply for a scholarship program by the government. These students will have to fill out a form containing further information about the family's income or any other shortcomings that might prevent them from earning study money. When they got accepted, the government will fully pay they study costs. This possibility also applies on the so called 'smart students', pupils who had exeptional results at secondary school or done something special for their local community. |
| Date | 11:09:10, February 09, 2006 CET | From | People's National Unity Movement (RDL) | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | We support 1 and 3, but cannot support 2. Any chance of taking that out and putting it forward as a separate bill? |
| Date | 12:05:48, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Devout Ecologists Party | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | PNUM, why do you support the articles, and not 2? What is your motivation? You can participate in the debate aswell. Now on to the debate. Why 21 is the "magic number"? It is not. The reason why it is 21 is simple, it is the maximum number the article will allow. And I think that when one comes from school, one should be considered an adult, so that is why the age one is considered an adult is 21, equal to when obligatory school stops. Now considering 18, I still ask, why? You say the system wouldn't be obligated to 'create' 3 years. Why those specific three years? Why are you not saying 16? You would spare the system 5 years they are obligated to 'create'! And you wouldn't be obligated to keep the students for 5, instead of 3 years! I said 16, because that is the lowest age the article allows. So I do not see your reason for 18. What is wrong with 21? It gives maximum oppertunity to study, to learn, to develop one's intelligence and mind. It provides the students with the bliss of learning, just the responsibility of study instead of responsibility of work or the responsibility for earning your money for a living. Additionally, studying until the age of 21 provides the nation with better educated individuals, which benefits multiple facets of the nation. And let's not forget the benefits for the individuals, they get a better start in this world, and are more developed. |
| Date | 14:45:01, February 09, 2006 CET | From | People's National Unity Movement (RDL) | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | I support article 3 because it is absurd that our young people are considered children and thus unable to make decisions for themselves till they are 21, also as minors cannot vote this denies citizeship rights to a large section of the population capable of making political choices. I support article 1 for similar reasons - young people should have the choice of whether they wish to stay in full time education rather than stay on in a system they may not feel meets their needs or desires. I oppose article two because it takes that choice away from many people, education should be seen as a right for all not a privilege to be paid for or handed out on spurious criteria. |
| Date | 14:50:18, February 09, 2006 CET | From | People's National Unity Movement (RDL) | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | Further to this the NCC proposal to means test scholarships would be inefficient and costly, the administration of such proposals is much more complicated than that for universal provision thus percentage wise a higher proportion of educational budgets would be wasted on bureaucracy rather than on providing education. Means testing also tends to put significant numbers of people off from applying who otherwise would and almost always leads to a situation where those who come just above cut off point of what is considered 'low paid' are significantly disadvantaged. |
| Date | 15:35:23, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | It is not an opportunity but an obligation, people have the opportunity to study their whole life. Better educated individuals can be achieved by maintaining and upgrading the educational system itself, not by keeping the compulsory age at 21 - it are the students themself who study, decide to study, not the government. Why 18? because my party believes a person reaches the adult status at the age of 18, this is not an scientific fact but an overall assessment, they are believed to be capable of entering into contracts, maintain their own financial matters, decide to go to work or to study. Any pupil who reaches the adult status - 18 or 21 - will have its own philosophy about what they want to do with their live, it the trend comes at the age of 18, they possibly wasting 3 years by 'enjoying' their so called 'opportunity to study' |
| Date | 17:53:02, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Front Canrillaise | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | I only support article 2, but #1 and 3 are not important enough for me to vote against this bill. |
| Date | 19:31:59, February 09, 2006 CET | From | Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Educational & College Grant Reform Act of 2182 |
| Message | We thank all the supporting parties. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 213 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 345 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 42 |
| Random fact: Moderation will not accept Cultural Protocol updates which introduce, on a significant scale, cultures which are likely to be insufficiently accessible to players. In particular, for all significant cultures in Particracy, it should be easy for players to access and use online resources to assist with language translation and the generation of character names. Moderation reserves the right to amend Cultural Protocols which are deemed to have introduced significant cultures that are not sufficiently accessible and which are not being actively role-played with. |
| Random quote: "The basis of a democratic state is liberty." - Aristotle |