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: Public Transit Act of November 2195
Details
Submitted by[?]: Proletariat Revolution Party
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: December 2196
Description[?]:
| The proleteriat use the public transit every day to get to and from their places of work and to conduct their daily lives. They are burdened by the cost of a 'user pays' system, which only serves a single purpose - to remove their hard earned money from their pockets. They aren't as affluent as the upper class citizenry who can afford more affluent methods of transit. However, it isn't just the improverished class who uses it; the middle class also uses it. Public transporation helps to save the planet and those who use it are those who are the foundation for the base of our nation and without them, the who nation would crumple into disarray. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Funding of public transport (where applicable).
Old value:: Public transport is fully user-pays.
Current: Public transport is fully subsidised for people with low-income, with the remainder "user-pays".
Proposed: Public transport is fully subsidised by the government.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:18:10, March 07, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Public Transit Act of November 2195 |
| Message | So, those who do not use a service should pay for those who do? Interesting concept. If this opasses, what is the next service to be fully subsidised by the government? I can see it now, state sponsered bordellos. |
| Date | 16:11:17, March 07, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Public Transit Act of November 2195 |
| Message | There is a difference between subsidising transit so that people can make it in life and be able to support their families and put a meal on the table and not have to pick between being ablke to buy healthy food and afford the transit fare to get to their place of work or to their doctor's appointment. |
| Date | 17:35:42, March 07, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Public Transit Act of November 2195 |
| Message | Personally, the AM AAP thinks the AM RLP idea of 'state sponsored bordellos' is an EXCELLENT idea. Also, we think the AM PF makes an excellent point.... we can encourage 'green' transit, by making the public transport system a viable alternative to 'private' conveyance. From the AM AAP point of view, the savings, ecologically, would MORE than balance the cost of state sponsoring the public transport infrastructure. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 299 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 202 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Character names must appear plausible and should consist of at least a first name and a surname. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented |
| Random quote: "A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar." H. L. Mencken |