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: Minimum Wage Reform of 2240
Details
Submitted by[?]: Lyika ati Isọdọtun
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: September 2243
Description[?]:
"Living wage" policies drive rapid inflation of consumer goods prices, which is a disservice to all Ikradonians in that it weakens our economy and our currency and devalues the very incomes that minimum wage policies seek to protect. We encourage this reform for the sake of economic stability in the future, recognizing that "living wage" programs are ultimately untenable. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's policy on minimum wage regulation.
Old value:: There shall be a minimum wage at a level considered a "living wage," well above the poverty line for a full time worker.
Current: There shall be a minimum wage at a level that a single full time worker on it can adequately subsist.
Proposed: There shall be a minimum wage at a level that a single full time worker on it can adequately subsist.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 00:53:22, June 10, 2006 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | I might be mistaking, but aren't you actually raising the minimum wage further by the proposal? If I understand correctly, the current one gives one worker enough money to support him/herself without falling under the poverty line, while the change you propose gives him/her enough money to support himself and three other people. Of course we'll support a raise in the minimum wage, but find the contradiction between the bill description and article 1 confusing. |
Date | 02:10:50, June 10, 2006 CET | From | Lyika ati Isọdọtun | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | We may have misinterpreted that option. A "living wage" is, as the description reads, "well above the poverty line." While we certainly wish to see poverty ended, "living wage" policies only serve to devalue salaries and inflate consumer prices, erasing any benefit minimum wage policies might provide. |
Date | 02:19:32, June 10, 2006 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | However, if the minimum wage rises to account for inflation that won't be the case. Proper economic management (monetary/fiscal policy) can also cancel out an inflationary effect. Price controls are another option. |
Date | 02:38:59, June 10, 2006 CET | From | Lyika ati Isọdọtun | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | And thus we create a fiscal inflationary monster that spirals out of control? The artificially high standards of living wage policies, though unquestionably noble in aim, are simply untenable in an economy that values any sort of economic personal freedom. As the NDP points out, we would have to resort to sweeping price controls in order to control the inflationary effects released by the living wage policies' interference with the free market. These price controls would have to be pervasive, covering every aspect of our economy. And with price control out of the hands of those with stakes in the market, there is no free market whatsoever. The impact of traditional minimum wage policies is less disasterous than that of the living wage. This is why we support a reform of our current minimum wage policy. We cannot abide the idea of stripping Ikradon entirely of its free market system, and we do not wish to see our economy spin out of control as minimum wages rise to account for rapid inflation, causing more inflation, which necessitates another rise of the minimum wage, and so on. Living wage is a good notion, but it is disasterous economic policy. |
Date | 04:07:19, June 10, 2006 CET | From | Iqembu Sokusebenzisana Yeningi | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | The IPC voted overwhelmingly in Congress to support this measure. A spokesman said, "Excessive minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Those minimum wage workers who support families already have their wages supplemented by Ikradon's social safety net. On the other hand, some individual workers might not be able to get jobs under a living wage structure. Therefore, in the name of human decency, we support this Act." |
Date | 11:58:29, June 14, 2006 CET | From | Ikradonian Faith Party | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | We oppose. Everyone deserves a good salary for their work. |
Date | 14:59:22, June 15, 2006 CET | From | Lyika ati Isọdọtun | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | The IFP oversimplifies the matter. No one has argued that people do not deserve a "good salary for their work." What is at issue is the definition of "good" in that context. The definition espoused by proponents of "living wage" policies puts the economy in danger and risks hurting those that minimum wage policies are meant to protect. Salaries do not exist in a vacuum, and we must take into consideration the larger ramifications that artificially inflated salaries have on our economy as a whole. We make this argument not because we believe that minimum wage policies hurt profits, but because, in the long run, living wage policies devalue all salaries and ultimately leave minimum wage workers in worse shape than they would have been otherwise. |
Date | 02:31:13, June 19, 2006 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | I pointed out that as a possibility. Economic management is the most effective tool here and remember we've had this policy for a very long time, and haven't been suffering from out-of-control inflation. |
Date | 20:26:15, June 19, 2006 CET | From | Lyika ati Isọdọtun | To | Debating the Minimum Wage Reform of 2240 |
Message | OOC: Yes, that aspect of Particracy does rather take the wind out of the sails of any apocalyptic argument, doesn't it? It doesn't much matter what we do; the country is immune to economic failure and civic unrest! Woohoo! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes | Total Seats: 197 | ||||
no |
Total Seats: 402 | ||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Before choosing a nation, you may wish to research it first. For more information on the cultural backgrounds of the nations, please see the Cultural Protocols Index: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6365 |
Random quote: "I got nothing against no Viet Cong. No Vietnamese ever called me a nigger." - Muhammad Ali, 1967, refusing to fight in Vietnam |