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: Encouraging the working population
Details
Submitted by[?]: Hobrazian Peoples Party
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: November 2224
Description[?]:
| We should implement changes to encourage and service our working population. We have found broad consensus in the parliamentary parties to change these things and hope for support. |
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 for people with low-income, with the remainder "user-pays".
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on Democratic Workers' Councils.
Old value:: The government does not intervene in the marketplace with regards to Democratic Workers' Councils.
Current: The government does not intervene in the marketplace with regards to Democratic Workers' Councils.
Proposed: The government requires most industries to be fully run by Democratic Workers' Councils.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:51:27, May 04, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Encouraging the working population |
| Message | How do either of these changes "Encourage the working population"? People with low incomes are not incapable of purchasing a bus/train/tram ticket, and though we would consider subsidising certain routes in order to guarantee services to those places that would hitherto recieve a poor service frequency or quality, to use vast amounts of Government money to provide free public transport to low income earners would be counterproductive. In relation to Government policy on DWCs, the government should not intervene. It is not the place of government to tell business how to operate their industries and there is certainly no evidence that DWCs would operate more efficiently or provide any improvement in product or service compared to a individually owned company or board. Should a company decide to operate as a DWC, then they should be supported within the law but in the same way as any other business. All this bill would do is reduce the number of entrepreuneurs interested in starting new businesses within this Country and so make our industry less competitive on the world market, as well as making no improvement in internally released products. |
| Date | 23:09:54, May 04, 2006 CET | From | Hobrazian Peoples Party | To | Debating the Encouraging the working population |
| Message | Since the government controls the vaist majority of industries, it would be smart to include the workers in the production. We also with this proposal tries to let those who work in the toughest industries and receiving the lowest amount of salaries to travel with a lower cost. This is encouraging and servicing the people. |
| Date | 21:31:25, May 05, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Encouraging the working population |
| Message | "We also with this proposal tries to let those who work in the toughest industries and receiving the lowest amount of salaries to travel with a lower cost." - You do seem to be forgetting where the money to pay for those services come from, even at a reduced price. In order for the Government to pay for all these things they either have to increase the price of the service or other goods that are produced in the public sector to cover the increased costs in providing cheaper fares to low incomes or increase taxation which would effect those on low incomes again. The money has to come from somewhere and, as stated above, a cheaper solution would be to subsidise those routs that provide a public service but are unprofitable, but allow those routes that are in profitable areas to continue to make a profit. In order to do that we cannot provide free fares. "Since the government controls the vaist majority of industries, it would be smart to include the workers in the production." - The government owns to many of the industries (I never thought I'd be put into the position of saying that!!). The government should be responsible for providing only those goods and service that are vital to the public need and should not be involved in any other sectors of the market. As for having workers included directly in the control of the industry, this is a foolish, idealistic but totally impractical means of operating a large industry. If all industries were small, localised industries, then the theory of complete DWC ownership might work, however in order to make Hobrazian industry a world leader and provide maximum output for internal markets those industries must have strong direction and the only way to provide that is through strong leadership, either through a manager or CEO or by a small group but certainly not by allowing anybody and everybody involved in the business to attempt to operate said business. The average worker is a follower and requires leadership. Now, this is not to say they should have no influence in any decisions at all, but thise influence is gained through a small group of workers, usually provided by the Unions, as a spokesman. However, even with everything above in mind, should an industry choose to operate in such a way then the government should not stop it, but it should not attempt to dictate how businesses should be operated, especially in such a time consuming and eventually fruitless way. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 179 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 188 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 33 |
| Random fact: "OOC", "IC" and "IG" are commonly-used acronyms in Particracy. "OOC" refers to comments, discussions and actions which are out-of-character, meaning they are done player-to-player rather than party-to-party. "IC" refers to in-character interactions (ie. party-to-party). Similarly, "IG" means in-game, although this term may also simply refer to what happens in the actual game interface, as opposed to on the forum or elsewhere. "RP" just means "role-play". |
| Random quote: "It is the hallmark of great society to debate and disagree without resorting to violence." - Mathew Jameson, former Hutorian politician |