[NSGS] New Democrats HQ

[Collatis]

Basically, a load of rubbish xD

Hey, in Murica we call that shit. Get it right!

[Intermountain States]

What's the topic?

Collatis was worshipping Beta
Beta was the almighty
Mal demanded to be worshipped to
Collatis salutes Mal
Beta pushes Mal
Mal runs away

NothiNg about shotfuns?

[Lykens]

Collatis was worshipping Beta
Beta was the almighty
Mal demanded to be worshipped to
Collatis salutes Mal
Beta pushes Mal
Mal runs away

NothiNg about shotfuns?

We don't discuss affairs concerning shotfuns with non exclusive elitist super secret and cool IRC Club members, sorry.

[Britanno 2]

Just to say, we'll have a party conference soon and we'll get out manifesto published.

[Mollary]

Just to say, we'll have a party conference soon and we'll get out manifesto published.

Great; how are we going to write the manifesto? I guess you could assign the sections to spokespeople, or we all could, or one person could and then we review it.

Either way, if a Chief whip's needed I'll put myself forward for it, unless someone else wants it.

[Britanno 2]

Great; how are we going to write the manifesto? I guess you could assign the sections to spokespeople, or we all could, or one person could and then we review it.

Either way, if a Chief whip's needed I'll put myself forward for it, unless someone else wants it.

I was thinking we could go through each topic at a time together so as to not prevent non-leadership members from being excluded from decision making. We'll vote to ratify on each section and if it gets passed, we move on, and if not, we review it. Considering we're only a small party I think we should say that 66% have to vote in favour for it to be passed, that way we minimise party division. Thoughts everyone?

And does anyone else want to be chief whip?

[Mollary]

Great; how are we going to write the manifesto? I guess you could assign the sections to spokespeople, or we all could, or one person could and then we review it.

Either way, if a Chief whip's needed I'll put myself forward for it, unless someone else wants it.

I was thinking we could go through each topic at a time together so as to not prevent non-leadership members from being excluded from decision making. We'll vote to ratify on each section and if it gets passed, we move on, and if not, we review it. Considering we're only a small party I think we should say that 66% have to vote in favour for it to be passed, that way we minimise party division. Thoughts everyone?

And does anyone else want to be chief whip?

Seconded.

[Arkolon]

I was thinking we could go through each topic at a time together so as to not prevent non-leadership members from being excluded from decision making. We'll vote to ratify on each section and if it gets passed, we move on, and if not, we review it. Considering we're only a small party I think we should say that 66% have to vote in favour for it to be passed, that way we minimise party division. Thoughts everyone?

And does anyone else want to be chief whip?

Seconded.

Umpteenthed.

[Dejanic]

Seconded.

Umpteenthed.

Quadrupled.

[Britanno 2]

Let's start with the manifesto, beginning with welfare. I've been going through the government's welfare reforms. We need to decide what out stance is on the following bills:

Housing Assistance Act
Social Insurance and Retirement Security Act
Social Safety Net Act
The Unemployment Assistance Act
Universal Family Assistance Act
Paid Parental Leave Act
Retirement Savings Act

I think that as a party we should broadly be in favour of these measures, but I need to read them over again to keep them fresh in my mind. I also have a few policy proposals of my own that I think we should coinsider for our manifesto (some of them may or may not be stolen from a certain government simulation game):

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours
Disability benefits - self-explanatory
Rent controls - can help reduce reliance on state housing and prevent homeslessness
Food stamps - means people can't spend their benefits on takeaways

[Atlanticatia]

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours

The EFA already covers ECE/childcare:

a. Early childhood education shall be provided for children under the age of three primarily by pre-existing childcare and other specialized educational establishments, and composition of which shall be as developed by the establishment themselves provided it is in compliance with HighScope approach developed in Michigan. Where evidence for pressing need of such establishment exists, following public consultation in such area the ministry of education may establish such establishments to provide early childhood education.
b. Early childhood education and any associated costs such as childcare during such period shall be provided to the parents without any direct costs to them, costs incurred in private establishments shall be invoiced to the government of Calaverde provided such amount is within financial guidelines issued by the government. Further, child enrolled in such program shall be mandated enrol in junior school at age of five unless there exists physical or mental disability prohibiting such enrolment.

(Just saying.)

[Prussia-Steinbach]

At work right now, but I'll go through all that when I get home. Though I'm relatively sure we should be supporting all of them.

[Britanno 2]

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours

The EFA already covers ECE/childcare:

a. Early childhood education shall be provided for children under the age of three primarily by pre-existing childcare and other specialized educational establishments, and composition of which shall be as developed by the establishment themselves provided it is in compliance with HighScope approach developed in Michigan. Where evidence for pressing need of such establishment exists, following public consultation in such area the ministry of education may establish such establishments to provide early childhood education.
b. Early childhood education and any associated costs such as childcare during such period shall be provided to the parents without any direct costs to them, costs incurred in private establishments shall be invoiced to the government of Calaverde provided such amount is within financial guidelines issued by the government. Further, child enrolled in such program shall be mandated enrol in junior school at age of five unless there exists physical or mental disability prohibiting such enrolment.

(Just saying.)

Oi you! Shhhh

[Mollary]

Let's start with the manifesto, beginning with welfare. I've been going through the government's welfare reforms. We need to decide what out stance is on the following bills:

Housing Assistance Act
Social Insurance and Retirement Security Act
Social Safety Net Act
The Unemployment Assistance Act
Universal Family Assistance Act
Paid Parental Leave Act
Retirement Savings Act

I think that as a party we should broadly be in favour of these measures, but I need to read them over again to keep them fresh in my mind. I also have a few policy proposals of my own that I think we should coinsider for our manifesto (some of them may or may not be stolen from a certain government simulation game):

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours
Disability benefits - self-explanatory
Rent controls - can help reduce reliance on state housing and prevent homeslessness
Food stamps - means people can't spend their benefits on takeaways

I'd oppose rent control; it usually fails as it creates a surplus of demand and reduces supply as renting becomes less lucrative. Although capping rent increases might work a bit better. I think I'd also potentially oppose Food stamps; we should make sure benefit claimants take responsibility in all aspects, with seeking work and being entrusted to spend their own benefits whilst they have to claim them.

[Arkolon]

Let's start with the manifesto, beginning with welfare. I've been going through the government's welfare reforms. We need to decide what out stance is on the following bills:

Housing Assistance Act
Social Insurance and Retirement Security Act
Social Safety Net Act
The Unemployment Assistance Act
Universal Family Assistance Act
Paid Parental Leave Act
Retirement Savings Act

I think that as a party we should broadly be in favour of these measures, but I need to read them over again to keep them fresh in my mind. I also have a few policy proposals of my own that I think we should coinsider for our manifesto (some of them may or may not be stolen from a certain government simulation game):

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours
Disability benefits - self-explanatory
Rent controls - can help reduce reliance on state housing and prevent homeslessness
Food stamps - means people can't spend their benefits on takeaways

I'd oppose rent control; it usually fails as it creates a surplus of demand and reduces supply as renting becomes less lucrative. Although capping rent increases might work a bit better.

Taken right out of my mouth.

[Mollary]

I'd oppose rent control; it usually fails as it creates a surplus of demand and reduces supply as renting becomes less lucrative. Although capping rent increases might work a bit better.

Taken right out of my mouth.

And that's not even just my IC view, I must be slowly moving to the right .

[Britanno 2]

I'd oppose rent control; it usually fails as it creates a surplus of demand and reduces supply as renting becomes less lucrative. Although capping rent increases might work a bit better.

It may be less profitable for the landlord, but it can help them because tenants are more motivated to pay on time so they can hold on to them (because they know that they are getting a good deal). Having said that, capping increases in rent may be a much better option, what level should we have it at then?

I think I'd also potentially oppose Food stamps; we should make sure benefit claimants take responsibility in all aspects, with seeking work and being entrusted to spend their own benefits whilst they have to claim them.

But it is a fact that we can't guarantee what people will spend their benefits on. If they waste it on, for example, gambling (which is perfectly understandable considering its addictive nature), then their benefits will have done nothing to prevent poverty. Food stamps, especially where we say what can't be bought, can help people get out of poverty while at the same time eating healthily and therefore reducing the health risks that come with eating unhealthy food.

[Dejanic]

Personally. I'd oppose rent controls, for largely the same reasons as Mollary. I'd prefer restrictions on unfair rent increases, and a push for more long term tenencies.

On the flip side, I support the idea of food stamps as a way to ensure welfare recipients have a portion of funds outlined for them for food. Welfare recipients overspending their funds is a problem, and I think ensuring they receive food stamps is a good step towards stamping it out.

[Mollary]

I'd oppose rent control; it usually fails as it creates a surplus of demand and reduces supply as renting becomes less lucrative. Although capping rent increases might work a bit better.

It may be less profitable for the landlord, but it can help them because tenants are more motivated to pay on time so they can hold on to them (because they know that they are getting a good deal). Having said that, capping increases in rent may be a much better option, what level should we have it at then?

I think I'd also potentially oppose Food stamps; we should make sure benefit claimants take responsibility in all aspects, with seeking work and being entrusted to spend their own benefits whilst they have to claim them.

But it is a fact that we can't guarantee what people will spend their benefits on. If they waste it on, for example, gambling (which is perfectly understandable considering its addictive nature), then their benefits will have done nothing to prevent poverty. Food stamps, especially where we say what can't be bought, can help people get out of poverty while at the same time eating healthily and therefore reducing the health risks that come with eating unhealthy food.

The thing is that food stamps may well add stigma to people claiming benefits, as they will be more visible as they have food stamps. Moreover, unhealthy eating among the worst off is due to the fact that less healthy food is generally available in worse off areas and is also more expensive than cheap, fatty takeaway food. Overall, the best way to tackle the issue of benefits going on cheap unhealthy food is to educate better about the harmful impacts of fatty food, and also to potentially look into taking unhealthy foods on the basis that they are demerit goods.

[Mollary]

Personally. I'd oppose rent controls, for largely the same reasons as Mollary. I'd prefer restrictions on unfair rent increases, and a push for more long term tenencies.

On the flip side, I support the idea of food stamps as a way to ensure welfare recipients have a portion of funds outlined for them for food. Welfare recipients overspending their funds is a problem, and I think ensuring they receive food stamps is a good step towards stamping it out.

Surely if overspending funds is a problem, then the way to fix that is to teach budgeting skills and personal responsibility, as opposed to regulating benefit claimants?

[Calimera II]

The thing is that food stamps may well add stigma to people claiming benefits, as they will be more visible as they have food stamps. Moreover, unhealthy eating among the worst off is due to the fact that less healthy food is generally available in worse off areas and is also more expensive than cheap, fatty takeaway food. Overall, the best way to tackle the issue of benefits going on cheap unhealthy food is to educate better about the harmful impacts of fatty food, and also to potentially look into taking unhealthy foods on the basis that they are demerit goods.

We must remember that Calaverde isn't a rich country: it is a country with a wide income gap and a large group of poor. I think we must assist poor people when it comes to food and give an incentive to eat good quality, cheap food. Furthermore, putting more money quickly into the hands of the people most likely to turn around and spend it can both boost the economy and cushion the hardships on vulnerable people who face a constant struggle against hunger. Food stamps would be beneficial for the (local) economy and would help the poor a lot.

Moreover, I would like a ''Precios para Todos'' (Prices for all) program: an agreement between shops and their supplier(s), with the Ministry of Economy overseeing the process and intervening when needed. The shops and suppliers agree on various prices of healthy food and the shops have a list of (in the program included) healthy, cheap products hanging somewhere in their shop. It can be done easily and cheaply. Moreover, a similar program (but with the intention to tackle inflation) has been implemented in Argentina (''Precios Ciudados''). In Argentina it works and many shops (including the big ones like Carrefour) participate.

[Armeia]

Let's start with the manifesto, beginning with welfare. I've been going through the government's welfare reforms. We need to decide what out stance is on the following bills:

Housing Assistance Act
Social Insurance and Retirement Security Act
Social Safety Net Act
The Unemployment Assistance Act
Universal Family Assistance Act
Paid Parental Leave Act
Retirement Savings Act

I think that as a party we should broadly be in favour of these measures, but I need to read them over again to keep them fresh in my mind. I also have a few policy proposals of my own that I think we should coinsider for our manifesto (some of them may or may not be stolen from a certain government simulation game):

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours
Disability benefits - self-explanatory
Rent controls - can help reduce reliance on state housing and prevent homeslessness
Food stamps - means people can't spend their benefits on takeaways

I'm against giving free things out so I won't be voting yes for housing and family assistance but if the party line is yes, I'll just not vote.

[Britanno 2]

I'm against giving free things out so I won't be voting yes for housing and family assistance but if the party line is yes, I'll just not vote.

Some of those pieces of legislation have already been passed, but it's important we as a party have a stance on them whether they've been passed or not. No member is expected to support every part of our manifesto, providing they agree with a majority of it and agree with the fundamental principles of the party.

[Dejanic]

Let's start with the manifesto, beginning with welfare. I've been going through the government's welfare reforms. We need to decide what out stance is on the following bills:

Housing Assistance Act
Social Insurance and Retirement Security Act
Social Safety Net Act
The Unemployment Assistance Act
Universal Family Assistance Act
Paid Parental Leave Act
Retirement Savings Act

I think that as a party we should broadly be in favour of these measures, but I need to read them over again to keep them fresh in my mind. I also have a few policy proposals of my own that I think we should coinsider for our manifesto (some of them may or may not be stolen from a certain government simulation game):

Childcare - pay for a certain amount of hours
Disability benefits - self-explanatory
Rent controls - can help reduce reliance on state housing and prevent homeslessness
Food stamps - means people can't spend their benefits on takeaways

I'm against giving free things out so I won't be voting yes for housing and family assistance but if the party line is yes, I'll just not vote.

Well we're a Centrist party, so we're going to support a welfare state. One that's more generous than say a centre-right "minimum to survive" welfare system, but less generous than a Social Democratic one.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I'm against giving free things out so I won't be voting yes for housing and family assistance but if the party line is yes, I'll just not vote.

Well we're a Centrist party, so we're going to support a welfare state. One that's more generous than say a centre-right "minimum to survive" welfare system, but less generous than a Social Democratic one.

^ What I was hoping our response would be. Saying, flat-out, no to any sort of "free things" is kind of contrary to a truly centrist political position. Hell, it's firmly right wing.