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: Sport Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Blobs
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: January 2083
Description[?]:
| This bill will help improve the standard of Hobrazian sport by setting up a series of governmental sports clubs for the following groups:- - Top class athletes who represent Hobrazia at the international level - Improving athletes who may join the above group - People who live in deprived areas - Young people in general These will be free of charge for those that attend. Private clubs will still be permitted to cater for the needs of other groups, and they will be able to charge for the serrvices provided. The government will also launch an advertising campaign to promote these new clubs and to get more people into sport. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The funding of sports clubs.
Old value:: The government does not fund sports clubs; only private ones are allowed.
Current: The government does not fund sports clubs; only private ones are allowed.
Proposed: The government funds some sports clubs side-by-side with private ones.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:31:55, July 08, 2005 CET | From |  United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | I don't see the point of putting govenment sports facilities into competition with private ones, as there is only so much money a government can afford to put into such projects. However, if it could be nationalised... |
| Date | 18:00:13, July 08, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | ...there would be even less money to give to the greater number. When we say "clubs" what exactly do we mean? Football clubs, athletic clubs or would it be closer to training facilities? |
| Date | 18:34:07, July 08, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | there wouldn't be less money to give, since profits would go to the government rather than big business? |
| Date | 18:49:39, July 08, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | Then your previous argument is moot. The profits from the government sports facilities would go to those facilities and could still operate in competition with private ones, where's the problem? |
| Date | 18:59:05, July 08, 2005 CET | From | United Socialist Movement | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | The problem is that capitalist companies and corporate fatcats grow and become insanely rich, whilst workers are exploited. That is the fundamental principle of capitalism: to make rich men richer. The USM cannot accept that. |
| Date | 20:45:09, July 08, 2005 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | While we agree with the USM on their anti-capitalist sentiment, the people involved in these sports clubs would primarily hail from the bourgeoisie (e.g. trainers, coaches, etc.). While we would greatly prefer for it all to be nationalized, there is little to fear in terms of worker exploitation if privatized sports clubs coexisted. It's not like we're talking about sweatshops here. |
| Date | 22:13:25, July 08, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | I was thinking of sports clubs in general, including all of the things mentioned. This is the main reason I chose to keep private clubs so as to allow ordinary people the ability to visit them as the government could not afford to set up and run so many clubs. If it makes any parties happier I could add a scheme where low income families are given passes for free access to private clubs so that even they can go to them. |
| Date | 22:50:57, July 12, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | I don't really see the worker exploitation in a Sports Club. Sports Clubs should only be Government assisted in either: A) Deprived areas. B) People are training to become part of a National or International championship (ie The Olympics) C) For helping young people become involved in sport related activities. The problem with providing low income families with free passes and others not is it starts to make another divide in society. Just because one family has both parents working and gets a living wage, and possibly a little bit extra, doesn't mean that on some other level they aren't struggling (mortgages etc) whereas a family could be deemed as low income and gain these advantages over the other family but be in Council accomodation so not be paying out as much in costs, so which would be deemed as worse off? |
| Date | 22:13:23, July 13, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | I've taken your suggestions - better now? |
| Date | 02:15:32, July 14, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | Much more agreeable. We will support this when the time comes to vote. |
| Date | 14:08:01, July 14, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | Have the LPU anything to say on this? |
| Date | 15:29:32, July 18, 2005 CET | From |  Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Sport Act |
| Message | Sorry for the delay in on this bill, but I think government sponsored sports clubs will in fact benefit our entire sports programs. For example, sponsoring a national soccer team will help bring the top athletes in the sport. It will also provide activities for children who have no other options once school is out of session, therefore it could prevent some crime as there will be something for them to do. I like this bill because the private clubs can produce quality players who can join a government sponsored club when certain nationial tournaments between nations, such as the world cup come into play. I'll support this bill enthusiatically. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 317 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 83 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When forming a cabinet, try to include as few parties as possible, while still obtaining a majority of the seats. |
| Random quote: "You can only progress when you think big, you can only move forward when you look further." - Arria Ivmarus, former Selucian politician |