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: Phone Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists
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: July 2247
Description[?]:
| Like it says.. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning phone services.
Old value:: The state subsidizes the phone service of low income families, and regulates the rates providers can charge for phone service.
Current: The state subsidizes the phone service of low income families, and regulates the rates providers can charge for phone service.
Proposed: The state subsidizes the phone service of low income families but does not regulate the rates providers can charge for phone service.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:40:50, June 25, 2006 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | Nice title. Its funny. We'll oppose. |
| Date | 18:33:32, June 25, 2006 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | Thank you. :) |
| Date | 16:37:19, June 26, 2006 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | *looks over his phone bill and nods* We agree with the Patriot Party. Opposed. |
| Date | 06:45:36, June 27, 2006 CET | From | Federal Conservatives | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | Why does the State subsidize low income family phones? While phones are important they are not life and death vital to an individual. The low income person can use a pay phone if required. We oppose THIS bill and would like to take it to the next level, doing away with subsidies soon |
| Date | 12:38:17, June 27, 2006 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | FC, we're not suggesting to make all phoning completely free. W want to keep a certain amount to be subsidised, as to allow all people to have a phone. One reason I see, for example, is when poor people want to escape from the 'poverty trap', having a phone number can be of use when they are applying for a job. Another reason: Calling 911 can be the difference between life and death when a fire breaks out for example. This proposal wants to deregulate the sector, because we think the market can handle this: A free market with several phone companies does not need price regulations. |
| Date | 14:50:45, June 27, 2006 CET | From | Federal Conservatives | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | Is a phone required to live? It is nice to have and can certainly be useful, should we buy everyone a computer and give them high speed cable? How about cable TV? College education? How about free health clubs? Should the govt pay for my car and my gas? All these things can be important and can help the poor find a job. The list goes on and on, by subsidizing phone service you only make it more expensive to those who do want it and those on the "fringe" lose out. Do away with regulations and do away with subsidies |
| Date | 16:16:27, June 27, 2006 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | Even I am not for doing away with regulations. That would be suicide for a nation if its "anything goes" |
| Date | 17:09:00, June 27, 2006 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | FC, constructive criticism would be nice, I just said I'm NOT suggesting to make it completely free... let alone cable tv or cars. However it has to be said that in my opinion education should be free. |
| Date | 18:35:20, June 27, 2006 CET | From | Federal Conservatives | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | This IS constructive crticism nobody said this was a free service but who pays for the subsidies? The government takjes money from taxes we all pay and then gives some of that money to people so they can have lower phone bills. Subsidies are fine if they are for urgent and required things needed to survive. Food stamps for example are acceptable. Is phone service a basic need? my point is we could make a point as to how many other things would help the poor giving them money for cars and gas would allow them to get to work, giving them free babysitting would allow them to work, giving subsidies to lower their health club plans would allow thenm to stay healthier and to possibly "network" with others. the line needs to be drawn at NECESSITIES, phones are NOT a basic requirement now are they? Nobody suggested "anything goes" doing away with phone subsidies, that has to go! |
| Date | 22:51:26, June 29, 2006 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Phone Bill |
| Message | Well, the current bill also subsidises phone services... Perhaps you could propose a bill of your own about this.. :) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 258 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 241 | ||||
| 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: "For among other evils caused by being disarmed, it renders you contemptible; which is one of those disgraceful things which a prince must guard against." - Niccolo Machiavelli |