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: DL - 146 Housing and Infrastrucure Reform Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Devpratimist League
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 4695
Description[?]:
| This bill is a bill which is more or less an amended format of SDP's bill Housing and Infrastructure Reform Act of 4693. We put forward this bill for the following reasons: 1) Using Eminent Domain for abolishing private property. Eminent Domain will help us to initiate more public works for the betterment of the nation. Also our party regards private property is an enemy in an society. We have debated this before so we will not repeat this again. 2) Subsidizing public transport makes the transport system efficient. Subsidizing user fares has been shown to increase ridership, which in turn increases the frequency of the entire system and reduces waiting times for all users (known as the “Mohoring Effect”). Additionally, by shifting people to more sustainable modes of transport, subsidies can help address the negative externalities of car use—like traffic congestion, air pollution, and fatalities. 3) The state should take the responsibility of housing. Capitalism cannot solve the housing problem as socialism does. Under capitalism, housing provision is based on what will make developers, lenders, and landlords rich — not what average people need to survive. That’s why we’ll never get decent, affordable housing for everyone under the free market. Socialists have to make the case, loudly, publicly, and globally: capitalism can never meet our needs for high-quality, affordable housing. The reason is straightforward: the profit motive. In a capitalist society, land and housing stock are treated as commodities, basic goods and services that can be bought, rented, and sold for a profit. And like all commodities under capitalism, it is the profit motive that rules the production and maintenance of housing. Profit is the lifeblood of the capitalist system. Metz described the process of capital accumulation using the letters M-C-M’, or Money-Commodity-More Money. This abstract formula points us to a really important conclusion. The purpose of capitalist production and exchange is not to create commodities; commodities are only a means to achieve more money than a capitalist began with. In other words, capitalists don’t stay in business based on the quality or quantity of the commodity they produce — they stay in business based on whether they turn a profit. What does this mean for housing? Creating and maintaining housing is decidedly not the primary goal of developers, construction firms, mortgage lenders, and landlords. Housing is just a convenient medium through which capital can reproduce itself — through which these developers, construction firms, lenders, and landlords can make more money. While socialists challenge the profit motive in consumer and industrial production, from cars and computers to steel and soybeans, it is just as important that we challenge the profit motive in the realm of what’s called “social reproduction.” Social reproduction encompasses the activities and services (like housing, health care, childcare, elder care, education, etc.) that are necessary to maintain the existence of a productive working class. This realm of human labor has been historically unpaid or underpaid, and its burdens have tended to fall on working-class women. Under neoliberalism, the privatization and commodification of social reproduction, expanding the free market into that realm of care work, has been a primary capitalist growth strategy. The expansion of charter schools, the selling off of water systems and other basic infrastructure, the huge rise of college tuition, “public-private partnerships” for basic services, for-profit elder care are some examples When housing prices fall, there is little incentive for landlords to deliver the proper upkeep and maintenance on rental stock, and many working-class homeowners find themselves underwater, meaning they owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth on the market. Moreover, local governments that rely on property taxes to fund social services are forced to slash them when they are needed most. Public schools, employment programs, and health care in these communities — all funded by those property taxes — suffer, resulting in even lower property values and further disinvestment. When housing prices rise — like the bubble we are currently experiencing, working-class people have their bank accounts squeezed, are displaced from their homes, and subjected to intensified policing. And in such an upswing, the profit motive acts as a powerful limiting factor in a capitalist society’s ability to meet our housing needs. It will never be as profitable to construct or lease housing stock intended for poor and working-class people as it will be for the high end of the market. Socialists should avoid the “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) trap of opposing new housing construction on the grounds of ruining homeowners’ nice views or “changing the character’ of the neighborhood. This is especially important given our project of building massive amounts of beautiful social housing in dense, livable urban neighborhoods. But we also need to steer clear of a noxious “yes in my backyard” (YIMBY)-ism which insists that capitalist developers would love to provide us with abundant, secure, and affordable housing if only we allowed them to build more. Many zoning regulations are stupid and not broadly conducive to healthy and sustainable urban space, but we shouldn’t buy the argument that places technical zoning legislation at the root of our housing crises. The actual root is capitalism. The capitalist class, through its monopoly on investment, is holding our society hostage over basic human needs like housing. Our society has the resources to produce stable, secure, and free or nearly free shelter for all. Capitalists refuse to meet this human need because it will never make them the profits they require to stay in business. We have to demand massive investment in democratically planned and maintained social housing. Capitalist housing developers will never do it. We’ll have to take their ill-gotten gains — through taxing them and all the other obscenely wealthy people in our society — and do it ourselves. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may not seize private property.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Funding of public transport (where applicable).
Old value:: Public transport is fully user-pays.
Current: Public transport is fully subsidised by the government.
Proposed: Public transport is fully subsidised by the government.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government policy regarding housing.
Old value:: All housing is privately-owned.
Current: The state provides public housing to low-income families.
Proposed: The state owns and maintains all housing.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribeVoting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 368 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 382 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "He comes out of hibernation once every three years and says something stupid. No wonder the UR fell apart." - Tirza Sommer, Pragmatic Party Leader, on the Dorvish President, Leonhard Khan. |