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: Social Freedom Act.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Federalist Labour 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: March 2037
Description[?]:
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawa Green Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | We do not agree. Forcing people to retire at 45 is just not reasonable. Work brings meaning and order into the lives of people. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawa Green Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | You don't want any social security??? What about the poor? Just let them struggle threw life?
As I understand it (for the view of a full social security) if people choose to retire, they get their (very basic) pension for the state (next to an additional personal pension) |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawa Green Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | As we hold the cabinet for health and social services, we shall see to it that a decent, affordable social security is established. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Federalist Labour Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | Social Security for the most part is nothing more than a compulsory retirement investment plan. We are not talking about wealth re-distribution in THIS case. By endorsing S.S you are saying that the general public is not "responsible" enough to plan and save for their own retirement. Thus the government must safeguard and retain people's hard earned money from themselves! That’s not freedom in any respect. You must take into consideration the countless millions that have died fighting to obtain TRUE un-regulated freedom. All you seem to want to do is regulate and revoke freedom. "But what about the poor people?" Well, I'll tell you, instead of revoking freedom in the name of socialism and equality, you get rid of the problem in true capitalism, that is wage. Get rid of the wage based slavery and oppression and you won't need socialistic economic controls or compulsory security programs. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawa Green Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | Get rid of wage? And do what?
As long as the Capitalistic system remains instated, social security in the only way to go. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawan Republican Alliance | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | As much as I don't like to admit it, yes, it is a compulsory retirement plan, because without it, the vast majority of the poor will be too improvished. But, playing the devil's advocate, if we get rid of wages, how will the elderly pay for medicine, for food, etc? |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawa Green Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | People controlling their own money is the way to go, but not everyone can make the right decisions. That's why the state must supply a basic pension for those who have made the wrong choices in life or just had some bad luck. This doesn't mean they'll be thilthy rich, they'll just have enough money to lead a decent life. People who were succesfull in life still will have a better lief , but a least no one will die of hunger. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Federalist Labour Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | Well, I'm not proposing simply "turning off" the wage-based system of today. It would be a gradual process of course over time. What does eliminating "wage" have to do with the elderly, paying for medicine and food? I believe that every citizen should have the opportunity to live the "Kirlawn Dream" no matter what "bad" descions they have made or what extent him or her is "educated". Wage-based Capitalism does not offer such opportunity; of course a select few that have antiquate drive can start from nothing and become extremely successful. But if you put that in prospective, not everyone can be "successful" in a wage-based economy, even if everyone is thoroughly educated and everyone is equally determined and driven to succeed. Some working-class citizens will still have to be impoverished. I don’t believe compulsory government charity will truly help these people, it does not give them any more opportunity, so what is it good for? Keeping them alive? That’s a failed system in my view, confiscating wealth, slowing expansion and progress of the economy, just so some people can eat, because there is not quality oppurtunity for them? WHY START OR CONTINUE A FAILED WELFARE PROGRAM? The age-old question of whether it’s better to give a man a fish or show him how to fish still remains. I believe in opportunity not subsidization. I say we abolish wage-based slavery and give everyone true and productive opportunity. Why should the people that are physically producing (whatever product) be paid the least of any of the people in involved? It takes 2 to tango. A wealthy educated businessman can build a factory and purchase all the needed equipment to produce (whatever product), but without the wageworker who has no other commodity to barter, but his own time and effort, can the factory actually produce (whatever product). |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Kirlawan Republican Alliance | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | That's still wages. If someone owns the factory and then pays people, that's capitalism, regardless of how they are paid. If everyone owns something and them divy up the revenue, that's collectivism, aka communism. What other system is there? |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Federalist Labour Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | I understand why you would reject my logic, because you are thinking within the current or known ideologies. I’ll go into a little more detail and attempt to clarify. Take a company that wishes to manufacture automobiles: The owner(s) or founder(s) invest in building the factory (ies) and purchasing all the necessary equipment and machinery needed to produce their cars. But in order for any automobiles to actually be produced that need one more commodity, the worker. In other words the worker is bought or purchased much like the machinery he uses, and most companies will always try to purchase the necessary commodities at the lowest “price” (wage) possible. Another problem that directly concerns wage-workers is that of inflation, if inflation rises, the workers income does not “automatically” increase to compensate for the inflation, BECAUSE THE WORKER IS MERELY A COMMODITY BOUGHT AT THE LOWEST WAGE POSSIBLE. What’s my solution, if we get rid of wage-based slavery? Well, roughly workers would be paid on their percentage earned. In other words the percentage of each product they make, that is sold, commonly known as “commission”. Thus in this type of society the working class, would have equal rights to their respective “employers” and their income would rise and decrease with the economy accordantly, automatically. Again it takes 2 to tango – both employer and worker should have equal rights. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | Federalist Labour Party | To | Debating the Social Freedom Act. | | Message | ALL that this act does, is give people the freedom to withdrawl their social security (if enacted) at age 45. Other wise you are forcing all people to work until that are of age 62 in order to receive their own damn money back. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 256 |
| no | Total Seats: 335 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America). |
| Random quote: "A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future." - Leonard Bernstein |