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: Budget proposal of January 2190
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill proposes to change the allocation of funds in the budget. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2190
Description[?]:
The Progressive Party propose to adjust the government's spending budget to better address the economic and social situation of the Republic of Likatonia. |
Proposals
Article 1
Ministry | Current Budget | Old Budget | Propesed Budget |
Head of Government | 2,400,000,000 LIK | 500,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000 LIK |
Foreign Affairs | 1,900,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000,000 LIK |
Internal Affairs | 3,420,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000,000 LIK |
Finance | 1,140,000,000 LIK | 5,000,000,000 LIK | 5,000,000,000 LIK |
Defence | 13,300,000,000 LIK | 19,500,000,000 LIK | 19,500,000,000 LIK |
Justice | 4,560,000,000 LIK | 12,500,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000,000 LIK |
Infrastructure and Transport | 19,000,000,000 LIK | 17,500,000,000 LIK | 17,500,000,000 LIK |
Health and Social Services | 11,400,000,000 LIK | 15,000,000,000 LIK | 14,200,000,000 LIK |
Education and Culture | 7,600,000,000 LIK | 20,000,000,000 LIK | 20,000,000,000 LIK |
Science and Technology | 3,800,000,000 LIK | 18,000,000,000 LIK | 18,000,000,000 LIK |
Food and Agriculture | 5,700,000,000 LIK | 7,000,000,000 LIK | 5,000,000,000 LIK |
Environment and Tourism | 3,800,000,000 LIK | 10,000,000,000 LIK | 8,000,000,000 LIK |
Trade and Industry | 7,600,000,000 LIK | 6,000,000,000 LIK | 4,500,000,000 LIK |
Total | 85,620,000,000 LIK | 151,000,000,000 LIK | 141,710,000,000 LIK |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 04:50:47, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | Paired with the new taxation bill, we would run a slight surplus. After many years of surpluses, we believe that a few years in the red couldn't hurt us. We want to hear feedback as to where we can put in more government spending to benefit the country. |
Date | 11:56:56, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | We suspect some parties will say defence, and we would agree, but we would also like to see some extra LIK into Education and culture and also Science and Technology. Overall however this proposal is to be commended. |
Date | 16:57:04, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | Well, the AM AAP wonders what the idea is behind the massive budget cut to the Head of Government, but that is the least worrying thing we see. The Progressive Party is taking money out of law enforcement, social aid prorgammes and healthcare? The Progressive Party wishes to cut spending on food and jobs? The AM AAP apologises, but we find this almost the exact opposite of a 'good' budget proposal. Opposed. Emphatically. AM AAP does not want to be remembered as a party that supported this... we want to be on record as a party that OPPOSED this 'anti-citizen' budget. |
Date | 17:58:39, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | In order to support tax cuts for the poor, we had to make cuts in certain areas. Food and agriculture is acceptable because we no longer grant farm subsidies and we don't have any govt.-run farms. We'd rather cut the fat from the budget to help the poor rather than throw money away like the AAP suggests. |
Date | 20:19:02, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | Curiously... the AM AAP doesn't actually recall ever suggesting 'throwing away money'. If the Progressive Party considers allocation of money to social concerns, healthcare, or feeding the poor... perhaps they should consider changing their party name? The AM AAP cannot see anything 'progressive' about starvation and disease. |
Date | 22:45:58, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | If the AAP has any concerns about our name, we will let them know that we are progressive in the sense of morality, but we are not a group of populists. We combine economic realism with that moral idealism. |
Date | 13:04:58, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Budget proposal of January 2190 |
Message | If the Progressive definition of 'economic realism' is starving the poor and promoting the spread of disease... the AM AAP just doesn't WANT that kind of 'realism'. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||||
yes |
Total Seats: 320 | |||||
no | Total Seats: 181 | |||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Moderation will not approve a Cultural Protocol request within the first 48 hours of it being requested. This is in order to give other players a chance to query the proposed changes, if they wish to do so. Moderation may be approached for advice on a proposed change, but any advice proffered should always be understood under the provisio that no final decision will be made until at least 48 hours after the request has been formally submitted for approval. |
Random quote: "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes." - Winston Churchill |