[PASSED] Repeal "Living Wage Act"

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Whats it matter, exactly? I don't believe either of us has done more than rely on manual telegramming thus far.

OOC: I'd just like to see it... for the purposes of transparency.

OOC: become a delegate.

[Celsuis]

"I have pulled and resubmitted this repeal with minor edits. We ask WA members who have already approved our previous proposal to re-approve this edited one. We apologize for the inconvenience."

OOC:

You can view the modified proposal here: http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vie ... 1440205594

[The Eternal Kawaii]

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

There is too much economic micromanagement going on in the World Assembly already. We'll support this repeal; let those nations who believe in a state-mandated "living wage" enact one of their own.

[Bright Waters]

"If you truly believe that the major flaws in GAR #21 do not necessitate its repeal, please address the fact that GAR #21 is written in a way that allows nations to negate the entire resolution by dishonestly defining poverty lines. The resolution, as it currently stands, does not function."

Ambassador, while we agree that GAR #21 does contain some flaws, much like all resolutions, the ideals and benefits of the law, to me, still outweighs the faults. The Republic stands opposed. Should the Ambassador be willing to show a replacement that would address these flaws, we would be willing to entertain such a notion.

[Celsuis]

Ambassador, while we agree that GAR #21 does contain some flaws, much like all resolutions, the ideals and benefits of the law, to me, still outweighs the faults. The Republic stands opposed. Should the Ambassador be willing to show a replacement that would address these flaws, we would be willing to entertain such a notion.

"The issue, ambassador, is that the benefits of the law are only in name. Since nations can define poverty lines in any way they please, the entire resolution can be rendered inoperative. This is on top of an additional eight problems that I have listed in my repeal. The resolution is flawed to the extreme and does not accomplish its stated goal."

[Bright Waters]

"The issue, ambassador, is that the benefits of the law are only in name. Since nations can define poverty lines in any way they please, the entire resolution can be rendered inoperative. This is on top of an additional eight problems that I have listed in my repeal. The resolution is flawed to the extreme and does not accomplish its stated goal."

Actually, no, they can't. GAR #21 specifically defines it, as shown below:

"DEFINES the Dependent Poverty Line as the Basic Poverty Line, substituting an average two-person dwelling for an average one-person dwelling, plus the cost of enough food and drink to keep a dependent healthy for a week, plus the pro-rata weekly cost of schooling for a dependent, less any additional income or benefits provided to all workers with dependents by the nation;"

If a nation wanted to play a game of semantics to avoid the legislation, then they could probably do so with every resolution that has been passed in the GA .

You have yet to propose an alternative, as the ideals of GAR #21 are not worth throwing away. As such, the Republic remains opposed.

Furthermore, the new information regarding the number of failed repeals also lends credence to the idea that this repeal is not this august assembly's time.

[Imperium Anglorum]

august assembly's time.

OOC: I see what you did there... cause... it's August...

If a nation wanted to play a game of semantics to avoid the legislation, then they could probably do so with every resolution that has been passed in the GA .

Parsons: Really, I will admit that is impossible. Believe me, we've tried in the Democratic Empire. Some resolutions are simply written exceedingly well and very rigorous definitions which cannot be challenged without simply re-definining words, which isn't very fair.

[Celsuis]

"The issue, ambassador, is that the benefits of the law are only in name. Since nations can define poverty lines in any way they please, the entire resolution can be rendered inoperative. This is on top of an additional eight problems that I have listed in my repeal. The resolution is flawed to the extreme and does not accomplish its stated goal."

Actually, no, they can't. GAR #21 specifically defines it, as shown below:

"DEFINES the Dependent Poverty Line as the Basic Poverty Line, substituting an average two-person dwelling for an average one-person dwelling, plus the cost of enough food and drink to keep a dependent healthy for a week, plus the pro-rata weekly cost of schooling for a dependent, less any additional income or benefits provided to all workers with dependents by the nation;"

If a nation wanted to play a game of semantics to avoid the legislation, then they could probably do so with every resolution that has been passed in the GA .

You have yet to propose an alternative, as the ideals of GAR #21 are not worth throwing away. As such, the Republic remains opposed.

Furthermore, the new information regarding the number of failed repeals also lends credence to the idea that this repeal is not this august assembly's time.

"It's actually quite easy for them to do so, ambassador. I ask you to refer to the clause. "NOTES that the Poverty Lines are defined on an area basis, and sets no limits as to how any nation may define such areas save that they must lie wholly within the nation's boundaries".

The clause you mention is also a perfect example of how flawed the resolution is. It grants dependent benefits regardless of whether an individual has a dependent or not and grants redundant schooling benefits as well.

I will not begin to draft a new proposal as long as I am not certain that this will pass. That's a waste of my time. The number of failed repeals simply indicates that the title and ideals of proposals often easily sway WA members. That is why I am asking all WA members to read my repeal in its entirety and consider my points in an unbiased fashion."

[Bright Waters]

"It's actually quite easy for them to do so, ambassador. I ask you to refer to the clause. "NOTES that the Poverty Lines are defined on an area basis, and sets no limits as to how any nation may define such areas save that they must lie wholly within the nation's boundaries".

The clause you mention is also a perfect example of how flawed the resolution is. It grants dependent benefits regardless of whether an individual has a dependent or not and grants redundant schooling benefits as well.

I will not begin to draft a new proposal as long as I am not certain that this will pass. That's a waste of my time. The number of failed repeals simply indicates that the title and ideals of proposals often easily sway WA members. That is why I am asking all WA members to read my repeal in its entirety and consider my points in an unbiased fashion."

Their poverty line definition must still come from within the nation, so it as not as though they can set the bar at $1 (or equivalent). And while I can appreciate your desire to not do extra work, I can't support removing an important safeguard without something waiting in the wings. Until then, we shall remain opposed.

[Celsuis]

Their poverty line definition must still come from within the nation, so it as not as though they can set the bar at $1 (or equivalent).

"Yes. However, within a nation poor individuals can easily be grouped into regions with a significantly lower cost of food, power, transportation, etc. And what if individuals in prison are included in these poverty line regions, ambassador? These people do not pay for food and utilities. Do you not see the problem with the resolution's indefinite determination of poverty lines?"

[Bright Waters]

"Yes. However, within a nation poor individuals can easily be grouped into regions with a significantly lower cost of food, power, transportation, etc. And what if individuals in prison are included in these poverty line regions, ambassador? These people do not pay for food and utilities. Do you not see the problem with the resolution's indefinite determination of poverty lines?"

The state pays for prisoner's food and utilities. I think any court, in their right mind, would take umbrage with the idea that the government would claim a region has a wage of $0. Going back to what I said earlier, just about every legislation is going to have a part of it that, if someone spent enough time trying, they'd find a loophole. Moving everyone to the same area and declaring that the standard would be one such example. But at least there would be a living wage for them. I suspect, if a nation decided to force its citizens into an area for the purposes of lowering the living wage, then these are the people who most need the living wage, as businesses in this nation would be most likely to pay people close to nothing.

And if a nation moved all the poor together, they'd still all earn a living wage for their area. If they moved all of them to one area, they wouldn't leave one poor person loose in the rich part of town for the purposes of proving your point.

Since you seem to have such an issue with this provision, what, may I ask, would you suggest be it's replacement? I have some ideas, but I'm curious to hear yours.

[Separatist Peoples]

Their poverty line definition must still come from within the nation, so it as not as though they can set the bar at $1 (or equivalent).

"Yes. However, within a nation poor individuals can easily be grouped into regions with a significantly lower cost of food, power, transportation, etc. And what if individuals in prison are included in these poverty line regions, ambassador? These people do not pay for food and utilities. Do you not see the problem with the resolution's indefinite determination of poverty lines?"

"That you're actively advocating the forced relocation of the poor speaks volumes to your position."

[Imperium Anglorum]

"Yes. However, within a nation poor individuals can easily be grouped into regions with a significantly lower cost of food, power, transportation, etc. And what if individuals in prison are included in these poverty line regions, ambassador? These people do not pay for food and utilities. Do you not see the problem with the resolution's indefinite determination of poverty lines?"

"That you're actively advocating the forced relocation of the poor speaks volumes to your position."

Parsons: That's unfair. I'm interpreting what he's saying as: poor individuals can easily grouped by maliciously defining the regions, like gerrymandering. Hell would be raised if governments started forcibly relocating voters to make it gerrymandering, so they just maliciously define regions.

[Wallenburg]

"Well, here come the economic conservatives only looking at the title of this resolution..."

[Celsuis]

"Yes. However, within a nation poor individuals can easily be grouped into regions with a significantly lower cost of food, power, transportation, etc. And what if individuals in prison are included in these poverty line regions, ambassador? These people do not pay for food and utilities. Do you not see the problem with the resolution's indefinite determination of poverty lines?"

The state pays for prisoner's food and utilities. I think any court, in their right mind, would take umbrage with the idea that the government would claim a region has a wage of $0. Going back to what I said earlier, just about every legislation is going to have a part of it that, if someone spent enough time trying, they'd find a loophole. Moving everyone to the same area and declaring that the standard would be one such example. But at least there would be a living wage for them. I suspect, if a nation decided to force its citizens into an area for the purposes of lowering the living wage, then these are the people who most need the living wage, as businesses in this nation would be most likely to pay people close to nothing.

And if a nation moved all the poor together, they'd still all earn a living wage for their area. If they moved all of them to one area, they wouldn't leave one poor person loose in the rich part of town for the purposes of proving your point.

Since you seem to have such an issue with this provision, what, may I ask, would you suggest be it's replacement? I have some ideas, but I'm curious to hear yours.

"Yes, however, I do believe it is possible to eliminate fatal loopholes from this resolution, ambassador. Countless other resolutions have done, and this resolutuon must be repealed and redrafted if it is truly to accomplish its goals of protecting workers across NS. Some examples of how this can be done include mandating that poverty line regions be confined only to regions of similar socioeconomic status within relatively close proximity of each other, and we must eliminate the flaw that allows individuals without dependents to receive dependent benefits. These are just some of many changes that could be made. I urge all WA members to vote For on this repeal."

[Imperium Anglorum]

"Well, here come the economic conservatives only looking at the title of this resolution..."

The conservatives would be asking for more protectionism. I, like many other liberals, support this repeal, whose end result would be the expansion of freedom for nations to enact their own policies which are reflective of the context for their area and situations.

[Povinksi]

It really doesn't matter what we think, the masses will always vote for WA resolutions. But if they didn't, I would most definitely not support this.
The point of a corporation is to make money, no? To maximize profits, business's pay the average worker a substandard wage, not nearly enough to live. But the worker pushes forward, hoping he can make more money. The only problem is, he can't afford that! Big Housing has sold him a toxic mortgage, little does he know. Big Pharma's diagnosed his son with "ADHD" which, according to Big Brothers school system, is a disability where a child is very rowdy and impulsive. So he buys "Magic Medicine" from them, and uses it on his son. Unfortunately, these simply cause life-threatening diseases. Then, Big Media encourages him to eat "healthy" by consuming genetically modified foods, and "sandwiches" with chemicals dumped into them. He doesn't know this, so he buys these foods, and gets cancer! He has to pay for chemo"therapy" which he can't afford. So his bank gives him a loan with 20% interest to continually pay off, while they use that money to buy politicians who enforce their laws. He eventually dies from "cancer" (chemotherapy). Luckily, he was worth millions of dollars to the companies of the world (who are in a partnership with each other). Welcome to Corporate Age. Thank you, and opposed.
*sits back down*
Uh, oh! Big Media also exposes his son to nudity and other inappropriate images and videos that serve to distract so they can control him even more. Follow the Money!

[Imperium Anglorum]

It really doesn't matter what we think, the masses will always vote for WA resolutions. But if they didn't, I would most definitely not support this.
The point of a corporation is to make money, no? To maximize profits, business's pay the average worker a substandard wage, not nearly enough to live. But the worker pushes forward, hoping he can make more money. The only problem is, he can't afford that! Big Housing has sold him a toxic mortgage, little does he know. Big Pharma's diagnosed his son with "ADHD" which, according to Big Brothers school system, is a disability where a child is very rowdy and impulsive. So he buys "Magic Medicine" from them, and uses it on his son. Unfortunately, these simply cause life-threatening diseases. Then, Big Media encourages him to eat "healthy" by consuming genetically modified foods, and "sandwiches" with chemicals dumped into them. He doesn't know this, so he buys these foods, and gets cancer! He has to pay for chemo"therapy" which he can't afford. So his bank gives him a loan with 20% interest to continually pay off, while they use that money to buy politicians who enforce their laws. He eventually dies from "cancer" (chemotherapy). Luckily, he was worth millions of dollars to the companies of the world (who are in a partnership with each other). Welcome to Corporate Age. Thank you, and opposed.
*sits back down*
Uh, oh! Big Media also exposes his son to nudity and other inappropriate images and videos that serve to distract so they can control him even more. Follow the Money!

OOC: Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

[Wallenburg]

It really doesn't matter what we think, the masses will always vote for WA resolutions. But if they didn't, I would most definitely not support this.
The point of a corporation is to make money, no? To maximize profits, business's pay the average worker a substandard wage, not nearly enough to live. But the worker pushes forward, hoping he can make more money. The only problem is, he can't afford that! Big Housing has sold him a toxic mortgage, little does he know. Big Pharma's diagnosed his son with "ADHD" which, according to Big Brothers school system, is a disability where a child is very rowdy and impulsive. So he buys "Magic Medicine" from them, and uses it on his son. Unfortunately, these simply cause life-threatening diseases. Then, Big Media encourages him to eat "healthy" by consuming genetically modified foods, and "sandwiches" with chemicals dumped into them. He doesn't know this, so he buys these foods, and gets cancer! He has to pay for chemo"therapy" which he can't afford. So his bank gives him a loan with 20% interest to continually pay off, while they use that money to buy politicians who enforce their laws. He eventually dies from "cancer" (chemotherapy). Luckily, he was worth millions of dollars to the companies of the world (who are in a partnership with each other). Welcome to Corporate Age. Thank you, and opposed.
*sits back down*
Uh, oh! Big Media also exposes his son to nudity and other inappropriate images and videos that serve to distract so they can control him even more. Follow the Money!

OOC: Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

I don't understand either. And what I do understand I reject entirely. Most Western medicine and GMOs are entirely safe, and we have no "Big Brother" school system. If we did, students would be marching out of class every day shouting corporate slogans with enthusiasm.

And shame on you, Povinksi, for marginalizing those who suffer from ADHD. It may not be cancer, it may not be Alzheimer's, it may not be dementia, but it sure as fuck is real.

[New Peoples Washington DC]

The living wage act doesn't affect me because I use labour vouchers but repealing it is a stupid idea if you remove it international poverty will skyrocket

[New Peoples Washington DC]

Actually, no, they can't. GAR #21 specifically defines it, as shown below:

"DEFINES the Dependent Poverty Line as the Basic Poverty Line, substituting an average two-person dwelling for an average one-person dwelling, plus the cost of enough food and drink to keep a dependent healthy for a week, plus the pro-rata weekly cost of schooling for a dependent, less any additional income or benefits provided to all workers with dependents by the nation;"

If a nation wanted to play a game of semantics to avoid the legislation, then they could probably do so with every resolution that has been passed in the GA .

Btw liberty and capitalism at don't compatible

You have yet to propose an alternative, as the ideals of GAR #21 are not worth throwing away. As such, the Republic remains opposed.

Furthermore, the new information regarding the number of failed repeals also lends credence to the idea that this repeal is not this august assembly's time.

"It's actually quite easy for them to do so, ambassador. I ask you to refer to the clause. "NOTES that the Poverty Lines are defined on an area basis, and sets no limits as to how any nation may define such areas save that they must lie wholly within the nation's boundaries".

The clause you mention is also a perfect example of how flawed the resolution is. It grants dependent benefits regardless of whether an individual has a dependent or not and grants redundant schooling benefits as well.

I will not begin to draft a new proposal as long as I am not certain that this will pass. That's a waste of my time. The number of failed repeals simply indicates that the title and ideals of proposals often easily sway WA members. That is why I am asking all WA members to read my repeal in its entirety and consider my points in an unbiased fashion."

[Tinfect]

Big Pharma's diagnosed his son with "ADHD" which, according to Big Brothers school system, is a disability where a child is very rowdy and impulsive.

OOC:
As someone who actually has ADHD, I can quite confidently assure you that it does, in fact, exist.

Then, Big Media encourages him to eat "healthy" by consuming genetically modified foods, and "sandwiches" with chemicals dumped into them. He doesn't know this, so he buys these foods, and gets cancer!

Practically everything you eat is the result of Genetic Modification. Welcome to the modern world. Advanced methods of agriculture are not giving you Cancer, Autism, ADHD, or implanting UN Monitoring devices. The trails left behind by aircraft are not Government Mind Control Clouds, and the Government is not run by the Illuminati.

He has to pay for chemo"therapy" which he can't afford. ... He eventually dies from "cancer" (chemotherapy).

As it happens, Chemotherapy is pretty much the best way we have of treating Cancer. It is not a "Big Pharma" conspiracy to drain the lower-classes of the wealth and lives.

Uh, oh! Big Media also exposes his son to nudity and other inappropriate images and videos that serve to distract so they can control him even more. Follow the Money!

Uh...
Don't get me wrong here, modern news-media is utter garbage, but it is not because of Nudity or "Inappropriate Images".

[The Candy Of Bottles]

OOC:

Then, Big Media encourages him to eat "healthy" by consuming genetically modified foods, and "sandwiches" with chemicals dumped into them. He doesn't know this, so he buys these foods, and gets cancer!

Practically everything you eat is the result of Genetic Modification. Welcome to the modern world. Advanced methods of agriculture are not giving you Cancer, Autism, ADHD, or implanting UN Monitoring devices. The trails left behind by aircraft are not Government Mind Control Clouds, and the Government is not run by the Illuminati.

OOC: Actually, you could really consider every domesticated species to be genetically modified- Artificial Selection is really just slow genetic engineering after all.

[Aetoria]

The Living Wage Act must be repealed. It does not achieve its (noble) objective. It aims to bring people out of the poverty line but does not recognise that most of the people living below the poverty line will not be in any form of employment. The majority will be living on social security payments. If you want to get people out of poverty in the short term you need more GOVERNMENT BENEFITS and SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENTS. In the medium-long term, you need to invest in EDUCATION and GROW THE ECONOMY so that jobs can be created. A degree of income inequality will help to encourage people to get an education as they will be rewarded with higher wages. Get better social policies and we will not need the Living Wage Act.

[Imperium Anglorum]

He has to pay for chemo"therapy" which he can't afford. ... He eventually dies from "cancer" (chemotherapy).

As it happens, Chemotherapy is pretty much the best way we have of treating Cancer. It is not a "Big Pharma" conspiracy to drain the lower-classes of the wealth and lives.

OOC: Surgery, until the tumour gets too large and may metastasise.

The Living Wage Act must be repealed. It does not achieve its (noble) objective. It aims to bring people out of the poverty line but does not recognise that most of the people living below the poverty line will not be in any form of employment. The majority will be living on social security payments.

If you want to get people out of poverty in the short term you need more GOVERNMENT BENEFITS and SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENTS. In the medium-long term, you need to invest in EDUCATION and GROW THE ECONOMY so that jobs can be created. A degree of income inequality will help to encourage people to get an education as they will be rewarded with higher wages. Get better social policies and we will not need the Living Wage Act.

Parsons: While we do find the caps ... objectionable, the general content is not wrong.