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: Basic Care Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Green Workers Party
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: June 2296
Description[?]:
| This bill is designed to dramatically increase the paltry health and education services provided by the state for Lusitanians. We find it unacceptable that in a prosperous country such as ours, basic hospital and health services are left unfunded and run-down by the government. We also seek to re-introduce a minimum safety net that has been long lost the Lusitanians, with a resultant increase in poverty and suffering to our most vulnerable citizens. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Health care policy.
Old value:: Health care is private, but is paid for by the state for people with low incomes.
Current: Health care is entirely private.
Proposed: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Guarantee of minimum income.
Old value:: There shall be no direct cash payments to individuals to guarantee a minimum income.
Current: There shall be no direct cash payments to individuals to guarantee a minimum income.
Proposed: All adults not supported by another person shall be guaranteed a reasonable, though not high, standard of living by the government.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the pension system.
Old value:: The state does not operate a pension system. Individuals must save up for retirement on their own.
Current: The state does not operate a pension system. Individuals must save up for retirement on their own.
Proposed: The state operates a compulsory public system combined with an optional private pension.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Pre-school education.
Old value:: The government leaves development of nurseries to the private sector.
Current: The government leaves development of nurseries to the private sector.
Proposed: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nurseries alongside heavily regulated private establishments.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The education system.
Old value:: Education is private, but the government issues vouchers to pay for the schooling of disadvantaged children.
Current: Education is private, but the government issues vouchers to pay for the schooling of disadvantaged children.
Proposed: There is a free public education system and a small number of private schools, which are heavily regulated to ensure they teach adequate skills and information.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:12:12, October 08, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | "The Social Liberal Party enthusiastically agrees with all of proposals except for Article 5. I would ask if it is possible to reach on agreement that we set Article 5 to: "There is a free public education system alongside private schools." We feel that private schools are able to regulate themselves as it in their best interest to provide the best education for their students. With Pre-School education and Health Care, the Social Liberal Party feels differently, about regulation. We feel that Private pre-schools may exist but must be regulated to health and safety standards, and the private health care also requires strict regulation to avoid lush profits and over-billing of the greedy private health industry." - Bob Rae. Social Liberal, Social Services and Health Expert. |
| Date | 23:12:37, October 08, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | Shoud have waited for a debate man. :| |
| Date | 23:17:33, October 08, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | "We'll vote favourably since 4 out of 5 is still 80% :) We'd still like to adjust the 5th article but it moves us albeit excessively in the right direction. It can always be changed or adjusted later if necessary." - Bob Rae. |
| Date | 23:35:22, October 08, 2006 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | The PP manifestates its suprising to the support of the SLP to these proposals presented by the Green Workers Party. We must conclude that the Social Liberal Party isn't a real LIBERAL party. Though it has liberal positions in social matters it isn't at all LIBERAL in economical affairs. It is clearly social-democratic. It is also surprising that a supposedly liberal party supports and goes into an "oposition alliance" with a Socialist/Communist party: Green Workers Party. We, the People's Party, think that the Social Liberal Party should assume its real agenda! A LIBERAL party would never agree with Laws tha HEAVILY restrict PRIVATE INITIATIVE. Think about it! |
| Date | 23:53:06, October 08, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | A Liberal MUST believe in positive Liberty. Positive Liberty means that a liberalised economy must be open and accessible for all. We have nothing against private industry or economic interests, however the only way to ensure that everyman has access to freedom, is by making sure that everyman has access to the tools necessary. Education, Health, Child-Care, Welfare and a Pension. As Adam Smith said himself. The Social Liberal laments that the Popular Party banned these public services and ended the welfare state to begin with. The last time that was practiced in the real world, some 200 hundred years ago, for every rich factory or business owner, there were roughly 200 poor people rotting and dying in the streets, all over major European cities. Modern Liberalism is a centrist/centre-left ideology and has been one since the stock market crash in 1929. There is a profound difference between Liberalism (as a political theory) and Liberalism as an economic theory. An analogy to your confusion is like trying to compare a Mustang (car) with a Mustang (horse). They are two different things. I'd also like to add that there are no communists hiding under the bed here. Nobody has banned the private industry. Nobody has nationalised businesses. I will not stand to heavily regulate the telecommunications, energy, private businesses etc. The interesting thing about Social Liberal Parties all around the world, such as The US Democrat Party and the Liberal Party of Canada, is that they are considered as too far to the right by socialists, and too far to the left by conservatives. In the end all they are, are Liberals and Centrists. |
| Date | 01:38:00, October 09, 2006 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | We think that the Social Liberal Party misunderstood a lot of the words and ideas of Adam Smith. Sure. Nobody has banned the private industry. But the Social Liberal Party is collaborating with laws that will greatly restrict private initiative and that will turn COMPULSORY a public pension system when it is known that this "ideal" system is in ruin and has no future. We think the the SLP should re-think it position on these matters and vote against this proposal. |
| Date | 02:28:19, October 09, 2006 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | We are open to NEGOTIATE with the Social Liberal Party a better solution for Lusitânia (remember that the PP plus the SLP have majority over the SLP plus the GWP) with what concerns to these matters than this solution presented by the left-wingers Green Worker's Party who will just restrict a lot private initiative and that really WORRY us and a great number os Lusitanians. As such, we would not oppose the following changes: National Health Care Policy: "There is a public health care system, but private clinics are allowed." Guarantee of minimum income: "All adults not supported by another person shall be guaranteed a reasonable, though not high, standard of living by the government." Pre-School education: "The government maintains a system of free publically owned nurseries alongside unregulated private establishments or Pre-school education is private, but the government covers the schoolcosts of poor families." The education system: "There is a free public education system alongside private schools." By saying YES to the proposal of the GWP the SLP is restricting private initiative and betraying a great slice of its voters. |
| Date | 02:41:34, October 09, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | A compulsory public pension system is not an "ideal" system that is in ruin and that has no future. The 1997 the Liberal Party of Canada, anticipating the future rapid demographic changes, they completely reconstructed the Canadian Public Plan and created the Canadian Pension Fund that administers the tax revenue for pension payments. Contrary to the forecasting of the systems utilised in many European nations (Including Portugal), The Canadian Public Pension Fund, (CPF) grows every single year, (averaging over 7% growth in capital since 97) despite the fact that it's only source of income from taxes is from a remarkably low contribution percentage from income salary (between 6% and 9%, much lower than in the United States http://www.sdc.gc.ca/en/isp/cpp/contribrates.shtml). The CPF hasn't stopped growing since it began and even modest estimates say that the fund will reach 250 billion Canadian dollars (roughly 176 million Euros) in surplus assets in the year 2016. The guaranteed minimum for a normal public pension in Canada today, is set at roughly 730€/month, (+/- 146 contos por mês). Those who wish to invest in private pension plans, they can still do so. The problem with the Portuguese system is that while it relies on continuous economic growth, the economy has serisously underachieved. Canada and Australia, are two examples of nations where Liberals, have guaranteed sustainability for the foreseeable future, proving to the world that a compulsory public pension system is still possible. Liberals made it happen. |
| Date | 02:54:44, October 09, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | "The two-tier health care system you propose is precisely what we have in Portugal. Nothing short of a disaster, where money seems to disappear and waiting lists are endless. The SLP is totally opposed to anything that abolishes public pre-school and we believe that private pre-schools must be heavily regulated. The only improvement we see currently is in the education system proposal: "There is a free public education system alongside private schools." That is what we prefer however we do not agree with unregulated private health-care, nor unregulated pre-school. The SLP simply will not allow disease, sickness to become business opportunities nor will we allow private pre-schools to carry out their market experiences, cutting security and quality costs at the expense of children. We are sticking with the Green Workers Party on this bill, but we are glad to see that the Popular Party understands where the balance of power always lies. In the middle. :-)" - Guy Verhostadt, |
| Date | 12:49:57, October 09, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | This bill is not only restrictive of private initiative and property as it is strongly restrictive of civil liberties. This measures makes public funded services almost compulsory giving no other choice for people to choose: this is totally insane. Furthermore, it makes a public pension system compulsory, giving no choice to the people to control and plan their own retirement, making them a king of "slaves" of the State all throughout their active life. We cannot agree with this measures as they are clearly an attack on liberty. We also have to critisize the Social Liberal Party agreement and concordancy with this measures and accuse it of false liberalism. The ideas subjacent to this measures are clearly not related to the original ideas of Adam Smith nor any other Liberal theoricist. We must reiterate our critics to the Social Liberal Party as it does not assume a real Liberal position on this matter. |
| Date | 18:40:15, October 09, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | Perhaps the honourable member of the Libertarian Party would care to read where I have demonstrated that these policies are precisely those defended by centre-left liberals, in Canada the US and Europe. |
| Date | 21:07:42, October 09, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | That's because centre-left liberals in Canada, the US and Europe are not real "liberals" but instead they are, as the PP has pointed out, essentially social-democratic. They're liberals just by name. Nothing else. |
| Date | 21:55:37, October 09, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Basic Care Bill |
| Message | Um.. actually no you are wrong. As I have pointed out you are confusing, libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism and economic liberalism and small 'L liberalism with big 'L' Liberalism. The Liberal Party of Canada is one of the founding parties of the Liberal International. Not the Socialist International. The European Liberals sit in the centre of Parliament: The ELDR: European Liberal Democrat Reform Party. It would be preferable to have a better understanding of the object of your critique. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes |
Total Seats: 188 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 112 | ||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play. |
| Random quote: "The theory of Communism may be summed up in the single sentence: abolition of private property." - Karl Marx |