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: Bill to reform State welfare
Details
Submitted by[?]: Demokratische Allianz
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: August 4191
Description[?]:
| This Bill seeks to reform the inconsistent welfare policies of Aloria, to ensure protections for the most vulnerable in our society and to end welfare gouging by the well-off. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding child benefit.
Old value:: The state guarantees child benefit to all families.
Current: The state does not provide child benefit.
Proposed: The state guarantees child benefit to families classified as low-income or poor.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Guarantee of minimum income.
Old value:: All adults not supported by another person shall be guaranteed a very basic subsistence income by the government. However, the provision of this is not to exceed a certain period of time.
Current: All veterans shall be guaranteed a very basic subsistence income by the government.
Proposed: All adults shall be guaranteed a very basic subsistence income by the government.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the pension system.
Old value:: The state operates a compulsory public system combined with an optional private pension.
Current: The state offers a voluntary public pension, combined with other voluntary private pensions.
Proposed: The state offers a voluntary public pension, combined with other voluntary private pensions.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The professional retirement age.
Old value:: 63
Current: 63
Proposed: 65
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 11:11:27, April 03, 2017 CET | From |  Demokratische Allianz | To | Debating the Bill to reform State welfare |
| Message | The DA argue that the existing welfare system unnecessarily provides for moderate and high-income earning households while providing insufficient support for low-income and poor households. The proposals above seek to remedy this situation by providing child benefits only to poor and low-income families, increasing the minimum income from a very basic level to a reasonable standard and by amending the pension system. The current system forces all retirees from age 63 to take a state pension. This places incredible economic strain on the federal budget. By making the state pension optional and maintaining a voluntary private pension scheme we lessen the burden on the government while ensuring that those who need state support receive it. Finally we call for the retirement age to be increased back to 65 (having previously been lowered from 65 to 63). This measure will increase the working age population providing economic benefits to the nation, and will also provide workers an additional two years of potential employment to save for their retirement. Furthermore, it will relieve the burden on the state pension system by restricting the number of potential recipients. We welcome debate on the proposals above. |
| Date | 21:40:55, April 05, 2017 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Bill to reform State welfare |
| Message | The Progressive Liberal Party strongly opposes this proposal for the following reasons: 1. Regardless of the status of the families they come form, children should be treated in an equal manner. Since public education is compulsory in Aloria, the state shall also make sure that the families have the necessary resources to send their children to school, to provide them with a healthy and happy life and environment and to ensure that nothing misses from their home. That is why, all families should receive child benefit. 2. Let's take the example of a person who from the age of 18 until he retires at 63 pays his taxes and works as employed - he brings support to the state budget for 45 years long. The government has not just the moral but even the economic duty to ensure that from the moment he can no longer work for himself, that he can life a happy, normal and healthy life unaffected by monetary status. However, things are different. You see, a man may retire at age 63 and from the moment he retires he receives a state pension (maybe coupled with other types of pensions) but a person may choose to retire at age 95 and work until that moment or remain unemployed and not retired. It's not entirely mandatory. The state pension system does occupy an important part of the state budget, but since the DA even opposes making college tuition free, we are curious about where the state budget money should even go? Defence? 3. The unemployed benefit guarantees a minimum income for a citizen who currently has no workplace, an income that should allow him to have a normal life, but only for a definite period of time until he has to find a place of work so he can sustain himself. We consider that Article 2 shall lead to a rise of unemployment. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 76 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 301 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 168 |
| Random fact: Dorvik is a nation based on Germanic and old Prussian cultures, it is located on the far north of Artania, making it an almost arctic nation. |
| Random quote: "There is no other definition of communism valid for us than that of the abolition of the exploitation of man by man." - Che Guevara |