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: Richards Essential Nationalization Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Catholic Workers Union
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: September 2290
Description[?]:
| -Richards Essential Nationalization Act- An Act to Nationalize Essential Industries. SECTION 1: Recognizing the importance of nationalizing those industries deemed as essential, the following bill will immediately demand the following: ---A. Nationalization of basic utilities, including water, gas, commuter rails, and airlines. ---B. Just compensation for the necessary nationalization of these industries. SECTION 2: That the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation coordinate a clean and natural transition to national ownership. ---A. The assurance of the government that the rights of workers to bargain collectively, strike, etc. will not be violated in the transition, nor will they be after full nationalization. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on industry and subsidies to industrial operations.
Old value:: The government acts as an investor of last resort, by nationalizing failing industries that provide vital goods or services.
Current: Certain industries are owned by the state, all others are under private ownership.
Proposed: Certain industries are owned by the state, all others are under private ownership.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:15:55, September 26, 2006 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | Essential industries do not need to be nationalised. They can be much more efficient in private ownership with competition driving down prices and so benefiting the people. Obviously oversight is needed to prevent monopoly situations, but this is as far as the state should go, except to guarantee the continuity of essential services should they get into difficulty. Therefore we can support temporary nationalisation of essential industries in the event of that being necessary, but certainly not full scale nationalisation. The state is not meant to run industries and state run ones are almost always overly bureacratic, top heavy and inefficient, wasting huge amounts of tax payers money. |
| Date | 13:22:47, September 26, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | I'll rebut this when I get home. |
| Date | 14:27:10, September 26, 2006 CET | From | Páirtí Sóisialach | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | And when you do, I'll come as close as possible to ripping your head off whilst still leaving you with a pulse. |
| Date | 04:30:24, September 27, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | "Threats aside, we maintain our position. It is a fact that inflationary trends in modern economics allow for little price decrease. It is a fact that publicly owned industries do not cut the corners private ones do to make an additional profit. It is a fact that privately owned corporations are just as top heavy as public ones, but without the oversight. It is a fact that in the end, privately owned corporations tendency to horde profits cost the tax payer just as much in fees as public maintenance would if paid by taxes. Our essential industries must not be left to the fluctuations of the market and the profit-driven aspirations of unstable individuals who are not beholden to complete oversight." -Douglas Fairweather IADP MP |
| Date | 04:51:55, September 27, 2006 CET | From | Telamon Royalist Party | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | *Sounds of 'Here, here!' come from the Royalist sections of the hall* |
| Date | 23:36:46, September 27, 2006 CET | From | Páirtí Sóisialach | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | The problem with your argument is that according to you, the only acceptable oversight is a government committee or board. This is ridiculous. The basis of liberty is ownership. Part of ownership and a worker's pride is stockholding. Public companies that are bureaucratically controlled, inefficient and unequivocally wrong, contribute to economic worries, not alleviate them. Honestly, which would you prefer: the NHS, or a private hospital in the US? It wasn't much of a choice until Margaret Thatcher injected some private elements. Alas, enough has not been done, and Labour has undone most of Her Ladyship's work. Perhaps you don't like corporations, I don't like trades unions; however, I do not advocate the destruction of that which I dislike: that is called discrimination. By removing the most profitable element in an economy, you would destroy it. In an economy like ours, every corporation should be held sacred. You mock profits. Profits indicate success. Corporations that make profits can pay their workers, provide benefits and pensions for employees and give back to the community. Like all business, they are taxed, and rightly so. This is a facet of sales tax. In our economies, inflation is a government creation (with some help from the citizenry). In case you need a lesson in economics, inflation is the printing of so much money that money is no longer worth face value. The citizens contribute to inflation when they spend. By saving, the individual can excercise a minor degree of control on inflation that collectively contributes to what they call 'boom and bust economics'. (Boom being when people save; bust being when they spend all they have and charge the moon) When governments have deficits, they contribute the most to inflation. The US government is primarily responsible for the economic slump we are in. Public borrowing, another tool of socialists, drives up inflation (prevalent in European governments). So, as you see, corporations are NOT a source of inflation; rather they are a tool against inflation. Only in a truly open market can an economy flourish. |
| Date | 03:28:37, September 28, 2006 CET | From | Telamon Royalist Party | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | ((Out of character, to be honest, I would FAR prefer a Canadian style health care system to the American one which, ultimately, killed my mother because of the authority that private health insurance companies have to force hospitals to suspend care because it's costing the company too much money.)) |
| Date | 14:50:22, September 28, 2006 CET | From | Páirtí Sóisialach | To | Debating the Richards Essential Nationalization Act |
| Message | I did not say that the American system was perfect, and I am sorry for the loss of your mother, but don't take it out on the people of Telamon. Were an NHS-style health service insttituted in America, Bush's deficit would quickly rise from 8 trillion to, can you say it, 20-or so-trillion. That is why the top rate of income tax in Britain in 1977 was above 80% and no bracket was bellow 40%. Thanks Labour. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 177 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 123 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Never use the same password as a friend. If two or more active accounts use the same password, they will be inactivated. |
| Random quote: "Corruption is the nightmare that keeps democracy a dream." - Anonymous |