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: The Economic responsibility act of 2341
Details
Submitted by[?]: Permissive Social Union
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: April 2342
Description[?]:
| We feel that Likatonia would benefit from the following changes. These will allow for a freer market and flow of capital. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on advertising
Old value:: Only advertising that meets certain set standards is permitted.
Current: All advertising is permitted.
Proposed: All advertising is prohibited.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Higher education tuition policy.
Old value:: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Current: The government fully subsidizes tuition.
Proposed: The government introduces means tested loans for higher education tuition, to be paid back by students after earnings reach a certain amount.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on Democratic Workers' Councils.
Old value:: The government does not intervene in the marketplace with regards to Democratic Workers' Councils.
Current: The government does not intervene in the marketplace with regards to Democratic Workers' Councils.
Proposed: Democratic Workers' Councils are not permitted to run a business.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:46:37, January 09, 2007 CET | From | AM Populist Social Democrats | To | Debating the The Economic responsibility act of 2341 |
| Message | So, you propose to allow blatantly false advertising, force students to graduate with huge debts, and say that even if a DWC can compete in the free market with no subsidy, it cannot be permitted to run a business? This is a huge fleece of the people of Likatonia. |
| Date | 14:44:41, January 09, 2007 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the The Economic responsibility act of 2341 |
| Message | Articel 2 we could support, but articles 1 and 3 are totally anti free market and are unsupportable. Why should a company not be allowed to promote its wares? And why should a DWC have less rights than any other group of investors? |
| Date | 20:31:26, January 09, 2007 CET | From |  Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the The Economic responsibility act of 2341 |
| Message | We would consider proposal 1, and support proposal 2, and don't have a strong position on position 3 at this time. |
| Date | 00:19:37, January 10, 2007 CET | From | AM Populist Social Democrats | To | Debating the The Economic responsibility act of 2341 |
| Message | Oops. We missed the problem. We thought the proposal was to permit all advertising, even false advertising. It is to ban it, which is equally bad in a different way. We agree with the ARLP's objection to prohibiting all advertising. We believe that as long as advertising is honest and subsidizes media (unlike such advertising as spam) and perhaps meets a few other minimal requirements, that a company should be free to promote its wares, as the ARLP says. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 47 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 152 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If you want to leave Particracy, please inactivate yourself on your user page to save the moderation team some time. |
| Random quote: "Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom." - Albert Einstein |