A New Nation (Character/Political Party RP) - Senate

[Kazarogkai]

I had been watching a listening to all the others make their stand and figured it was time that I did the same. I wished not to show favoritism for either one of the major parties(Pioneers or Progressives) and alienate one or both. I had recently given a concession to the Pioneers in the form of my support of a recent bill as such I would give something unto the Progressives. Strategy had a lot to do with my decision but simultaneously it had to do with my desire for continuity. The Pioneers already had the majority and the House Majority leader position, they didn't need the Speaker position.

"I, Senator Daniels vote for Senator Monroe."

[Terrelis]

"I, Senator Monroe, vote for Senator Monroe."

[Neo-Chicago]

"Well, looks like Senator Monroe is the speaker, 83 to 50 votes. Speaker, I'll give the floor to you." Senator Louis said begrudgingly, walking back to his seat.

[Terrelis]

"Thank you all for once again putting your trust in the Progressive Party, I promise that you won't regret it. Seeing that the previous debate and vote for the National Revenue Act was nullified, by whom I cannot say, we will begin this session with the resubmission of that bill. Senators may now debate on the bill, and you may all speak freely. Here is the correct copy of the bill as the one in the qeue started by Sebator Louis is wrong, which isn't very surprising."

National Revenue Bill

[Neo-Chicago]

"Senator, I see no reason for an escalation of percentages. You're literally punishing people for earning more. If you were to keep the percentages as 10 percent for all citizens, those who earned more would still pay more, it's not a flat tax. 10% of 10,000 is 1,000, 10% of 35,000 is 3,500, 10% of 50,000 is 5,000, and so on. I hope you actually hear this out, not dismissing it as soon as you hear 'punishing people for earning more'." Senator Louis said.

[Terrelis]

"Senator Louis we are not punishing people for earning more we are making them pay back a higher percentage of what society has given to them. It may not be a flat tax but it is a flat tax rate and that is still unfair to those who earn less; we raise taxes so that we may provide services to those in need and the more money we raise the more services we provide. If that means people who earn more have to be taxed at higher rates then so be it."

[Camelone]

"As of now the tax rate should be lowered to less than 10% as we want to attract the wealthy here along with corporations so as Columbia will become a economic powerhouse for its size much like Monaco and Andorra. A strong economy will make it more likely that Columbia will become recognized internationally and, if I may add, Columbia is not developed enough to introduce the tax that this bill would enforce. It would most certainly push the people away that we are in most desperate need of." Senator Shafik said as he stood up in opposition of this bill.

[Terrelis]

"Senator Shafik the time for enticing large corporation to come to Columbia was four years ago. We need not focus on foreign companies but on giving out people the tools to begin their own businesses, and a flat 10% rate takes away from that as it allows big business executives to keep more money and continue to dominate the markets. I disagree that we aren't developed enough, we may not be a first world nation but we are well developed for our geographic size and population."

[Camelone]

Senator Shafik chuckled "You really believe the people aren't capable enough to provide for themselves? Look in the neighborhoods where the guild system has been reinstated, the standard of living has increased and people support each other willingly and most of all the government stays out of their wallet. Anyways Columbia needs those large corporations because, news flash, we don't have any raw materials. Small businesses can not stand here unless there is a reason to trade here and what better way for that to happen than to make Columbia enticing for corporations to come here. If there were any natural resources here, or any way to create a successful economy I would be the first one to promote it but sadly we have nothing of interest here. Why do you think no country wanted to claim this land?"

[Kazarogkai]

"Something I do wish we could add as of now would be a provision specifically stating that any money that a person directly receives from the government will not be counted for taxation purposes, seems rather redundant to give someone something then immediately take it back like that."

Amendment to the National Revenue Act
Author: Senator Solomon Daniels(NCF) | Sponsors: N/A

---

Section II

D. All income received as a result of any government aid or welfare of any sorts will not be counted for taxation purposes as a part of personal income.

"Just a lesson ladies and gentleman the entire point of a progressive system is not meant as a way of punishing those who earn more but simply addressing the age old problem known as ability to pay. The value of money to people decreases the more you have, the rich getting taxed at 10% affects them less than the poor getting taxed at 10%, because the poor need every penny whereas the rich have plenty to spare. Living costs and the prices of various items, both luxuries and necessities, no matter how poor or wealthy you become remain relatively the same from person to person. An apartment will always be 50 bucks a month, that glass of water will always be 1 dollar not matter how much money you personally make in an entire year. A guy who makes $1000 a month and who has a living cost of $500 a month is far more effected by a tax that takes away 10%($100) of his income than another man who has the same equivalent living cost but makes $10,000 a month. Ability to pay is the entire point of progressive taxes, those who are able to pay more should pay more. Progressive taxation unless taken to the utmost extreme will not discourage businesses, if there is a demand there will be a supply to meet said demand. Such is the nature of business."

[Camelone]

"Than should we not have a much lower tax rate? I would be in favor of the progressive tax if, and only if, the max tax rate would be 10%. I believe this is a good compromise and if we need to raise more funds for a project that would benefit the country we can impose an increase of the tax rate on the wealthy first but once the project is complete the tax would be dropped back to normal." Shafik retorted.

[Neo-Chicago]

"Senator Daniels, 10% is different depending on the amount of money you gain. The rich paying 10% still has them pay more as they earn more, that was what I was trying to explain. Also, there's no need to propose an amendment to an issue that hasn't even passed yet. The relation from the amount of money earned to paid is still the same, 10% of $10,000 is $1,000, and 10% of $500 is $50. To a person who earns $10,000 dollars, $1,000 is exactly the same to the way a person who earns $500 thinks of $50 dollars."

[Terrelis]

"The national revenue act is now at vote, senators are asked to vote for, against, or abstain. I vote for the national revenue act."

[Camelone]

"I vote against. It doesn't feel right to vote yes to this act." Senator Shafik said.

[Kazarogkai]

"Not my favorite bill in the world, and in need of some improvement, but still never the less it is necessary. As such I Senator Daniels and my fellow party members vote yes to this bill."

[Neo-Chicago]

"I'm afraid my party and I are going to have to vote against the bill in its present form." Senator Louis told the room.