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 Anti-Dumping Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Centrist 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: July 2074
Description[?]:
| The purpose of this bill is two-fold. First off, all subsidy assistance to farmers will be cut off. This will encourage our farms to be efficient and self-sufficient. It will discourage them from flooding domestic markets with large amounts of food and other agricultural products, thus driving their own prices down to the point that they cannot cover their costs and go out of business. It will also lower our country's net food exports, thus preventing us from "dumping" agricultural exports into other countries and damaging -their- economy. The second part is a protectionist measure. To ensure that our newly reduced agricultural funding does not result in other nations dumping food on us and destroying the -rest- of our farms, we will levy a tariff on foreign agricultural imports. It will not be a flat tariff designed only to improve our own nation's production, however. It shall be a gradiated tariff designed to encourage free trade measures and prevent foreign dumping in general. Other countries that do not subsidize their agriculture shall not be subject to the agricultural imports tariff. The amount charged to merchants wishing to import will increase directly with the amount of money the foreign government gives in handouts to it's farmers. However, to prevent sudden shocks to our market, we shall phase in this tariff gradually. It shall start small and increase 5% every year. This increase shall be perpetual. It is not a blanket increase, however, it is just an increase in the maximum amount possible. Should any sudden food shortages occur, all food-related tariffs will be abolished until the emergency passes. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Current: The government allows local governments to craft agricultural subsidy policy.
Proposed: The government denies subsidy assistance to farmers.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:43:59, June 26, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | I would like to note that the perpetual tariff increase clause does not increase the charge every year. It only increases the amount possible to charge every year. It will take a good number of years before it is a genuine threat to foreign merchants. The purpose of this is to ensure that there is a solid market reason for other nations to pursue free-trade measures. It ensures that farmers and merchants eventually unite in demanding reductions in subsidies. If that happens, they will for a significant voting bloc. The only problem I can see is that this will essentially kill all trade with countries that operate their agricultural facilities as a state-run system. Since ALL the money then comes from the state, the maximum tariff will always be charged to them. Does anyone know how to prevent this from killing trade with communistic nations? It's not meant as an anti-communist decree. |
| Date | 17:04:25, June 26, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | This seems to kill most food trade - export and import. |
| Date | 17:43:29, June 26, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | You're right; at present it is indeed extremely protectionist. If we can convince other nations to abide by the same or similar rules, however, then it will be a help rather than a hindrance to trade. Therefore, of course, I'm also trying to convince other nations to consider this same idea. See here: http://www.takeforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1024&mforum=particracy |
| Date | 21:22:07, June 26, 2005 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | I support the tariff, but i don't believe removing the subsidies will have any effect. Since no money was budgeted for any subsidy ...the market is fully efficient- and the only shock will be that of prce appreciation once the tariff is applied. |
| Date | 11:04:35, June 27, 2005 CET | From | Edelweiss Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | We don't support this, government subsidies help farms to survive and protect their products from foreign imports. An execution of this proposal will be the final blow for all little and middle-big farming companies. |
| Date | 13:39:16, June 27, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | People's Party: Then would you support this? According to what you say, it would not cost us much of anything in terms of subsidy assistance lost. SocialGreens: Our purpose in this is to replace the subsidy with the tariff. They both encourage the local economy, but the tariff brings in non-tax-based revenue, while the subsidy is a money hole. Which one would you prefer? |
| Date | 06:41:14, June 28, 2005 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | There is zero subsidy anyway- so whatever lazy slobs social greens wants to protect are long gone.. and yeah i will support the bill |
| Date | 06:42:06, June 28, 2005 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | Now its your job, sa economy minister to budget for what comes in from this. |
| Date | 14:10:39, June 28, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | This is part of an international initiative. As per such, the tariff revenue will be routed into foreign aid for so long as our "tied" aid policy stands. If that policy is struck down, then this revenue defaults to control of the Economic Minister, who can decide where the funds are allocated at that time. |
| Date | 17:03:23, June 28, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | Have you got the support of other nations on this? my support depends on the answer. |
| Date | 18:31:21, June 28, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | Sorry, LPE. I do not. I won't be offended if you vote against, since you were offering your support on defined conditions. |
| Date | 17:08:37, June 29, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Agricultural Anti-Dumping Act |
| Message | Bah. This'll never get international support. It'll probably never even pass here. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 64 | |||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 136 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The majority of nations in Particracy are "Culturally Protected" with an established cultural background. Only the "Culturally Open" nations are not bound by the rules surrounding culture. The Cultural Protocols Index should be consulted for more information about the cultural situation of each nation. |
| Random quote: "Power always has to be kept in check; power exercised in secret, especially under the cloak of national security, is doubly dangerous." - William Proxmire |