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: Gated Communities Act 2221
Details
Submitted by[?]: Centre Démocratique
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 2222
Description[?]:
To remove housing regulations in the private sector. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning gated communities.
Old value:: No gated communities are allowed.
Current: Both the government and the private sector can set up gated communities.
Proposed: The private sector can set up gated communities.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 14:33:38, May 01, 2006 CET | From | Jelbék Zemojad Lofrkad Prta | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | Gated Communities are not necessary. They create resentment, and increase the class divide. However, the DLP believes this is an issue for Regional governments (if that is possible). |
Date | 20:17:56, May 01, 2006 CET | From | Free Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | What is a gated community? |
Date | 01:49:50, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Centre Démocratique | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | Unfortunately it is not possible to leave this issue to the regions. We would support that move toward devolution. However, we feel the government is wielding too much authority on the private sector by not allowing gated communities. Gated communities are usually looked after by private security and anyone entering must be invited by residents of the communities. Obviously, these communities usually exist in more affluent areas. We are aware of the class divide that is a part of this. Unfortunately that is a problem that the larger society has created, not gated communities. We do not believe the government should infringe upon the rights of private individuals and groups to set up communities that they wish to live in. This is ultimately a civil liberties matter. |
Date | 02:19:58, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Jelbék Zemojad Lofrkad Prta | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | If the police forces the Free Republic supplies are deemed so inadequate gated communities must be established then there is a serious problem. However, this is not the case. We cannot allow forbidden palaces in which the rich live under a law of their own. This is not a good idea. |
Date | 04:09:44, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Green Manalishi Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | The GMP is unsure of the DLP's stance on this matter, but agress with the original sense that "they create resentment, and increase the class divide". Therfore it opposes the new proposal which offers potential for these "forbidden palaces". |
Date | 04:26:09, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Centre Démocratique | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | While, yes, gated communities do often attract wealthy residents, people of all incomes should have the freedom to make up their own minds if they want to live there or not. The government should not do that. What a group of 300 Buddhists wanted to set up a gated community that would be their personal and private area. Shouldn't they be allowed to set up their community. The security forces I mentioned are not necessarily in all gated communites. The communities decide. But they are by no means a police force. Think more along the lines of mall security guards. I believes this is a civil liberties issue. The government need not make restrictions on the housing arrangements of private individuals. |
Date | 04:44:20, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Green Manalishi Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | The GMP is of the opinion that groups sharing common interests already have ample opportunity to openly live close to each other, and it can not promote the notion that social isolation and division are beneficial. |
Date | 19:49:10, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Free Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | I still do not get it. If rich people want to go and live together, why should we force them not to??? If someone want to live with friends and away from averbody else, it is there choice. I support. |
Date | 20:46:16, May 02, 2006 CET | From | Green Manalishi Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | It is regrettable that the Conservative Party seems to have misunderstood the situation; there is ample opportunity for groups sharing common interests to live in the same vicinity without having to give up numerous social benefits and liberties by erecting divisive walls throughout the community. We urge the DLP to show strength enough to stand by their original conclusion that "Gated Communities (...) create resentment, and increase the class divide" by withdrawing this contradictory proposal. |
Date | 00:46:52, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Free Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | So what? If people want to shut themselves out from the world, why stop them? "...there is ample opportunity for groups sharing common interests to live in the same vicinity..." Well, if they wanted to share common interests, they would not build the wall, would they? |
Date | 03:14:32, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Jelbék Zemojad Lofrkad Prta | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | Because they are our people. Gated Communities are traditionally established in poor countries with a rich elite, in order to protect said elite. These are usually third, sometimes second world countries. The provision of police protection in these countries is often inadequate to prevent the majority of poor rioting, or, even worse, walking through rich areas. Therefore they set up gated communities. This is simply not the case in Jelbania. There is no good argument to allow these generally harmful things, aside from, 'why not?'. That is not how a country should be governed. |
Date | 04:33:34, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Free Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | So, they are our people and we should make decisions for them? That is not right at all. We are their government; we are theirs, not the other way around. |
Date | 01:46:04, May 04, 2006 CET | From | Jelbék Zemojad Lofrkad Prta | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | The Prime Minister, Keir Butler, responds to Conservative criticism: Uh, yeah. They elected us. |
Date | 03:37:28, May 04, 2006 CET | From | Free Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | No, actually they elected me. You are Prime minister because that is what WE voted for. Either way, they elected us to suppress people they do not agree with? That is not fair. |
Date | 04:10:43, May 04, 2006 CET | From | Jelbék Zemojad Lofrkad Prta | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | The Conservative Party, whilst certainly not idiots, do tend to speak absolute rubbish on occasions. |
Date | 19:43:57, May 04, 2006 CET | From | Free Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | Excuse me if I believe in freedom. |
Date | 05:38:19, May 05, 2006 CET | From | Green Manalishi Party | To | Debating the Gated Communities Act 2221 |
Message | Freedom, means not dividing communities with walls that exclude people, and not commoditizing social spaces. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||
yes |
Total Seats: 375 | |||
no |
Total Seats: 250 | |||
abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Large scale RP planning (such as wars, regional/continental conflicts, economic collapse, etc.) should be planned (as best as it can be) and should have consent of a majority of players involved. |
Random quote: "A lot of people are waiting for Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi to come back, but they are gone. We are it. It is up to us. It is up to you." - Marian Wright Edelman |