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: foundation party market regulations
Details
Submitted by[?]: Foundation Party
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: November 4183
Description[?]:
| We need to regulate the market |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The banking system.
Old value:: The government operates a central bank and all other banks are private.
Current: All banks are privately owned.
Proposed: The government operates large, national banks, but small community based private banks are allowed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning phone services.
Old value:: There are no regulations on phone service.
Current: There are no regulations on phone service.
Proposed: The state regulates the rates providers can charge for phone service.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:47:44, March 20, 2017 CET | From | Patriotic Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the foundation party market regulations |
| Message | Member of Congress, We cannot back this bill as we believe Article 1 "The Banking System" goes too far towards government control of the economy. However, we are not adverse to Article 2 and we say to our Right Alliance colleagues in the Foundation Party that we could back this is if was proposed spearately. Samson Moriarty Speaker of the House |
| Date | 17:04:58, March 20, 2017 CET | From | Foundation Party | To | Debating the foundation party market regulations |
| Message | OK no problem. Every party should have their own opinion |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 122 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 578 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play. |
| Random quote: "For among other evils caused by being disarmed, it renders you contemptible; which is one of those disgraceful things which a prince must guard against." - Niccolo Machiavelli |