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: Rich Taxation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Left-Wing Populists of Kalistan (LWPoK)
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: May 4407
Description[?]:
| For us to work towards a future where the rich do not control the taxation in Kalistan, it should be required that the rich are taxed 2-3% more money than the middle and lower class individuals and families. The upper-class should not be allowed to keep their money and use it to aid their own businesses while the middle and lower class have to pay money to the government to aid the businesses and lifestyle of the upper-class. This bill is on behalf of The Left-Wing Populists of Kalistan. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 10
Current: 1
Proposed: 15
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:01:50, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Liberal Party of the URK (LURK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | People should Ben allowed to keep he money they earn, plain and simple. We're not in deficit nor do we need to increase spending, so taxes are fine as they are. Not to mention that this bill only seeks to make the rich poorer and not to enhance the lives of those who are actually the lives than who actually poor. |
| Date | 03:17:16, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | I would like the Speaker from the LURK to look at this 100 Ruble note I have in my hand here. Does it say "Dianne Carrangus' Money"? I will save you the trouble. No it does not. Does it say "United Republic of Kalistan" on it? Again, out of courtesy, yes it does. So, please tell us all, whose money is this? I'll let the Speaker of the LURK answer that question. Though I don't doubt that the Speaker will answer incorrectly, I'll wager this Hundred that he does. |
| Date | 05:07:44, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Liberal Party of the URK (LURK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | I would Like Ms. Carrangus to look at her black of her shirt. She will likely notice that there is a brand name. Does that mean, Ms. Carrangus, that that shirt isn't yours? Or is it still owned by the brand? Madame, as you may have noticed entering this building, my car is parked in the lot outside. It, as do most cars, has a brand name on it. Does that mean, that I do not own the car? Like any sensible person, I would trust that the answer is "no". I would like you to think of our currency in a similar light. Your 100 Ruble note is simply our "brand" of credit, but because you own it, it's yours. Now imagine that whoever created your shirt or my car wanted to take it back. What if they claimed ownership upon the grounds that their brand name was written on it? That would seem non sensible. Let us then, think of legal tender in the same respect. |
| Date | 06:25:22, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | Comrade Speaker, Interesting point. However, Brands are owned by private corporations, while Money is inherently social: It is merely a mode of exchange between individuals. The reason it has any value at all is because people trust the word of the Republican Government that it means what it claims to mean. In other words, we use money with the words"United Republic of Kalistan" on it because the Republic will back up your transferance of said currency from one to another, and defend your use of it as a medium of exchange. However: To demonstrate that currency is different from the brand name on my shirt, Let me make two additional points. I can make my own shirt, and can then attempt to trade it. From one person, perhaps a very ignorant person, I will be able to exchange my shirt for 10 rubles worth of goods and services, while from another, I will only get 5 rubles of goods and services for it. My shirt therefore is worth what my buyer and I can agree it is worth. A 100 Ruble note is ALWAYS worth 100 Rubles, whether seller or buyer agree it should be or not. Because the value of that note is set by the Republic, not the seller or consumer. The money is worthless if not for the process of us imbuing it with value. Furthermore. I can create my own shirt and generate my own value. I can make my shirt, put my brand on it, and I can refuse to sell it for less than 10 Rubles. I will likely starve for want of buyers at that point, as I am not a skilled tailor. But nonetheless, I, nor any of our fellows can create their own money. In fact, it is against the law for them to try to do so. The money is merely USED by them to signify something. It is merely a symbol that means 10 rubles worth of goods here or 25 rubles worth of services there. Unlike My Shirt, therefore, the Republic can pass a law tonight that says each note in our pocket is worthless, and it will be, while the Government cannot pass a law that says this shirt is worthless, and I should be rebated the amount that I paid for it. But, if our friends in the LURK wish to try to see just what the money is worth without Government backing, perhaps they will join with us and co-sponsor a little social experiment. We will invalidate every single piece of Republican currency, and simultaneously allow citizens to mint their own currency. And we will finally get to see how much the currency is worth when it is ACTUALLY owned by the Citizen. If the LURK is not willing to join with us in this experiment, perhaps it will at least accede to some of our points, and move forward with us in abolishing this nonsense that money belongs to the individual. None of this touches the point of this bill, by the way. Our speech merely attempts to discuss the merits of the LURK Speaker's speech against the Bill. |
| Date | 06:26:59, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | And please, for the Record, I prefer to be addressed as Comrade Speaker or Dianne if the Office is not to be acknowledged. While I appreciate the respect proffered by the title Ms., I would prefer a gender neutral appellation, if one must be used at all. |
| Date | 18:23:11, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Liberal Party of the URK (LURK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | Dianne, I would like to embark on a different experiment. What about, before disowning our currency, we supported citizens in changing it to the currency of a foreign nation. Banks will still accept it to pay off credit, people will still use t, and at the end, we will still be forced to use it. The difference is, it won't bear our Nation's name, and according to you, won't be ours to tax. If you want to abolish credit, you need to understand that others won't. |
| Date | 20:10:51, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Left-Wing Populists of Kalistan (LWPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | All people of the nation have to pay tax, poor or not, to benefit the government. But what if the money that the poor pay go to rich private corporations? Well, it does. When the rich pay tax, they are still rich, unless they were at the point where if they paid so much as one dollar they would be classified as a middle-class citizen, whereas when the poor pay tax to the rich it makes it so that the rich never paid anything to start with. |
| Date | 20:20:10, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Left-Wing Populists of Kalistan (LWPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | All people of the nation have to pay tax, poor or not, to benefit the government. But what if the money that the poor pay go to rich private corporations? Well, it does. When the rich pay tax, they are still rich, unless they were at the point where if they paid so much as one dollar they would be classified as a middle-class citizen, whereas when the poor pay tax to the rich it makes it so that the rich never paid anything to start with. |
| Date | 21:06:07, June 09, 2018 CET | From | Liberal Party of the URK (LURK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | LWPK, We're not saying it's wrong to tax people. Only that we need some justification for increasing taxes. At the moment, we have neither a deficit nor a need to increase spending. So then why not give more wealth to the people? A rising tide lifts all boats, after all. |
| Date | 00:18:56, June 10, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | The Socialist Party of Kalistan's traditional position is to oppose an increase of Corporate taxation. We believe that increase in corporate taxes is actually a backdoor sales tax. Corporations always pass their costs onto consumers, including their taxes. On any god or service, corporations set their profit margin, and will raise their price to ensure their profit margin, without regard for supply and demand equilibrium pricing models. As their costs go up, they NEVER cut into their profit margin, and if they can't make their desired margin, they would prefer to make nothing than to cut into that precious profit margin. So if the Government raises taxes on corporations, they either raise their prices on the consumers, or go out of business. An increased corporate tax never actually hurts the business, it only hurts the consumer. So we will likely vote against an increase in corporate taxes. |
| Date | 00:22:06, June 10, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Rich Taxation Act |
| Message | To our comrades in LURK, To your counter-proposal, I would reject that. The goal is to demonstrate what happens to the economy when the money ACTUALLY belongs to private citizens the way liberals claim that it does. Foreign currency is still backed by a government, just not ours. I want to see what happens when McDon's prints its own currency that can legally and freely circulate, or where JoeBob Bennots prints his own bills that he tries to actually buy stuff with. I want to demonstrate that money NEVER belongs to people; it is supplies to people to use in place of barter. It is merely a medium of exchange, it is not a thing with value in and of itself. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 431 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 319 |
| Random fact: Parties have the ability to endorse another party's candidate for the Head of State election (if there is one). This adds a strategic element to the elections. |
| Random quote: "The free market is ugly and stupid, like going to the mall; the unfree market is just as ugly and just as stupid, except there is nothing in the mall, and if you don't go there, they shoot you." - P. J. O'Rourke |