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: Agricultural subsidy policy
Details
Submitted by[?]: One Nation Socialist 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: January 2256
Description[?]:
| Giving ourt farmers new incentive to suceed in the farming market. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Current: The government subsidises agriculture based on market demand for the crop being grown.
Proposed: The government subsidises agriculture based on market demand for the crop being grown.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning farm size.
Old value:: Farm size is not regulated.
Current: Farm size is not regulated.
Proposed: Small farms are encouraged to merge together into larger ones.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:51:22, June 30, 2006 CET | From | Federal Conservatives | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | Why are larger farms better farms? How do you propose these mergers take place? Merging a small yet growing farm with an already large farm does little for the current farmer, he turns from an active growing business to a sharecropper working for someone else. Again, rich getting richer as our hard working lower class drops by the wayside. OPPOSE |
| Date | 23:24:33, June 30, 2006 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | Opposed to both articles. |
| Date | 23:42:05, June 30, 2006 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | Opposed to both articles. |
| Date | 02:08:51, July 01, 2006 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | we third the Opposed to both articles. |
| Date | 11:15:34, July 01, 2006 CET | From | One Nation Socialist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | larger farms- economies of scale. And if the little guys work together they can take on the big players of the farming industry so there is little unfair competition and a highly efficient market. Only the small fars are encouraged to merge together please read the article closely FC. This stops the rich getting richer and makes all farms more competitivewith each other |
| Date | 23:43:21, July 01, 2006 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | Currently there's no regulation on the size of farms. If the economies of scale are substantial enough, in an highly efficient market larger farms will automatically arise, since farms will automatically want to merge with eachother to realise those economies of scale... |
| Date | 10:00:30, July 03, 2006 CET | From | One Nation Socialist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural subsidy policy |
| Message | exactly do those who aren't stong enough to survive on their own can merge and provide more competition. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 224 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 275 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow role-play that seems to belong to the world of fantasy, science fiction and futuristic speculation. |
| Random quote: "A democracy that does not allow limits is not a democracy. Just as a limitless freedom is not freedom, but prevarication. Indeed, any theory of freedom worthy of this name is first of all a limit theory. If we extend the unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not willing to defend a tolerant society against the attacks of the intolerants, then the tolerants will be destroyed and the tolerance with them! Because, I ask to myself and ask you, given a certain system that we call democratic, which is today the best possible system to allow everyone to live freely and to be able to express their own thoughts, how can the same system admit attacks against its integrity? How can a system refuse the principle of the self-preservation? For this reason, to suppress the apologetics of thalerrism, it's for this reason that the exaltation of exegetes, principles, facts or methods of Thallerism and its anti-democratic aims does not constitute a violation of the freedom of manifestation of thought, but, on the contrary, the celebration of that freedom. The protection of the first premise on which a modern democratic system is based. And this premise must be safeguarded also and above all against itself and its abuses." ~ Malik Astori, Leadership of Liberty and Progress (Istalia) |