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: Investor of Last Resort Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Socialist Party of Darnussia
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: January 2203
Description[?]:
| If private businesses that provide goods and services vital to Darnussia fail, we must nationalise them in order to revitalise them and ensure that the vital industry can continue. Otherwise, important goods and services may cease to be produced because private companies cannot make them profitable. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on industry and subsidies to industrial operations.
Old value:: The government does not intervene in the market nor provide any form of subsidies/relief to industries.
Current: The government acts as an investor of last resort, by nationalizing failing industries that provide vital goods or services.
Proposed: The government acts as an investor of last resort, by nationalizing failing industries that provide vital goods or services.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:40:15, March 19, 2006 CET | From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the Investor of Last Resort Act |
| Message | No, then where's the competition and incentive for businesses to survive if they know that they can suckle on the giant teat of the government? |
| Date | 02:21:21, March 20, 2006 CET | From | Socialist Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Investor of Last Resort Act |
| Message | They cannot 'suckle on the giant teat of the government'. This bill provides plenty of incentive for the businesses to succeed. If the business fails, the government seizes the business. I think that's a pretty good incentive to not fail, wouldn't you say? Besides, this is only vital industries that are important to our nation, not all failing industries. |
| Date | 03:01:09, March 20, 2006 CET | From | Social Democratic Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Investor of Last Resort Act |
| Message | Tax payers money is better spent on helping the poorest and worse off in society. Besides, whats the point of nationalising an uncompetive business and prolonging the fact that the business will go bust sooner or later no matter how much many we burn and throw into the black hole of the failed business, it is completely pointless. We be much bettering spending the money we would waste on "saving" thebusiness, it would be much better spent on giving the workers that would be unemployed new training and helping them get back into work as soon as possible. |
| Date | 10:37:23, March 20, 2006 CET | From | Labor Party | To | Debating the Investor of Last Resort Act |
| Message | This would quite a good idea. Unfortunately the capitalist parties currently in power are obviously against it, hopefully this will change in the future. It would allow for a fail-safe, to make sure no vital infrastructure could be possibly damaged, how can you not see that? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 127 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 423 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The majority of nations in Particracy are "Culturally Protected" with an established cultural background. Only the "Culturally Open" nations are not bound by the rules surrounding culture. The Cultural Protocols Index should be consulted for more information about the cultural situation of each nation. |
| Random quote: "Global warming, at least the modern nightmare vision, is a myth. I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world's politicians and policy makers are not." - David Bellamy |