NSG Senate Coffee Shop: We don't serve decaf

[Bleckonia]

It looks like it made sense to Ark.

Regardless of the government spending part, it will most likely destroy the work force. It will make hiring an employee extreme expensive and many small businesses can't afford such a thing.

Have we developed a tax code yet? Is there a proposal?

[Collatis]

Now that the confusion over taxes has cleared up and to distract from book-banning bills:

Retirement Savings Act

---

Authors: Geneviève Duflot [LDP], Sebastian Luc Morales [DL]
Sponsors: Michael Giuliani [DL]

---

Preamble:

To establish a universal retirement savings system in order to prevent poverty among the elderly and manage the issue of an aging population.

Article I: Definitions

1.) "Employer" shall be defined as "A person or entity who is contractually bound to a worker - the employee - to give that worker money as a salary or wages, in exchange for ongoing work and for which the employer directs the work and exercises fundamental control over the work".

Article II: Retirement Savings Plans

1.) A government-managed National Retirement Savings Plan shall be established, which shall be managed by a board of directors appointed by the Minister of Finance.
2.) Private savings plans may be established and information regarding fees charged, expected annual returns, composition of investments, and risk must be released to the public.
3.) Employees may choose the plan of their choice and shall have the option to transfer funds once annually.
4.) The self-employed who would otherwise not qualify shall have the option to join a plan.

Article III: Employer Contributions

1.) Employers shall contribute 5% of their employees' wages to their retirement savings plan in the first year.
b.) The contribution rate shall increase by 1% per year until it reaches 10%.
2.) The first $3,500 of employer contributions shall be tax-free.

Article IV: Government Contributions

1.) The government of Calaverde will contribute $1 for every $2 contributed by the employer, up to the first $1000.

Article V: Personal Contributions

1.) Members of savings plans shall be free to contribute to their retirement fund at any time.
2.) The first $1,500 of personal contributions shall be tax-free.

Article VI: Withdrawal of Funds

1.) Members of savings plans may withdraw up to $30,000 from their fund for a down payment on their first home or for medical costs.
2.) Plan holders shall be able to fully access their funds after the age of 60.

I agree. This tax debate is getting nowhere and has been repeating itself for ages. I think that we ought to move on now.

[Geilinor]

You're still trying to pass bills that levy taxes on top of the actual budget plans. The issue has not been dealt with at all.

It isn't actually a tax. If you want a budget, go to Atlanticatia.

[The Nihilistic view]

You're still trying to pass bills that levy taxes on top of the actual budget plans. The issue has not been dealt with at all.

It isn't actually a tax. If you want a budget, go to Atlanticatia.

Tax- An involuntary fee levied on corporations or individuals that is enforced by a level of government in order to finance government activities.

So I guess if it's not a tax it's a voluntary contribution and can be opted out of.

[The Liberated Territories]

Still we should not limit the freedom of information of our people regardless of if it is controversial or not.

The bill is not limiting anyone's freedom in the least by taking these books of the government's shelves. That's like saying that not giving someone a 1,000 dollar paycheck every week is limiting their freedom. If people really wish to read Ayn Rand then they should get it from the private sector, they shouldn't be putting the cost of their reading interest onto the hardworking taxpayers.

Best argument against public libraries in general.

Also Anthem wasn't that bad.

[The Liberated Territories]

Any legislation prohibiting books nationwide from our public libraries is an affront to freedom everywhere.

I've implied before that if you subscribe to that belief you must also affirm the need for a large welfare state, to be short you are using Liberal Egalitarian logic not Classical Liberal logic, to reach your conclusion that the bill infringes upon freedom.

Classical Liberalism, like all liberalism, was based on liberal egalitarianism. Defining ideas were equality under the law, equal vote, and equal (negative) freedom (in a sense that no class, group of people, or whatever would have legal privileges over another.)

[Murkwood]

The bill is not limiting anyone's freedom in the least by taking these books of the government's shelves. That's like saying that not giving someone a 1,000 dollar paycheck every week is limiting their freedom. If people really wish to read Ayn Rand then they should get it from the private sector, they shouldn't be putting the cost of their reading interest onto the hardworking taxpayers.

1. Best argument against public libraries in general.

2. Also Anthem wasn't that bad.

1. Public Libraries are a wonderful thing, and must be protected.
2. It was decent. One of her few good works.

[New Werpland]

I was referring to Vedastia's claim "Any legislation prohibiting books nationwide from our public libraries is an affront to freedom everywhere." as being Liberal Egalitarian.

And what the hell is "liberal egalitarianism"?

Liberal Egalitarianism is a type of Liberalism that puts into perspective the economic weight upon people's freedom, which is an utterly horrible and un-philosophical explanation of the whole movement, if you want a good definition go to Wikipedia.

[Collatis]

I remember being forced to read Anthem and hating it. Not only did I obviously disagree with some of it, but I also found it to be predictable, uncreative, and just boring in general. I used to describe it as the Giver narrated by Gollum. However, I do agree that it is far better than the rest of her work.

[New Werpland]

I've implied before that if you subscribe to that belief you must also affirm the need for a large welfare state, to be short you are using Liberal Egalitarian logic not Classical Liberal logic, to reach your conclusion that the bill infringes upon freedom.

Classical Liberalism, like all liberalism, was based on liberal egalitarianism. Defining ideas were equality under the law, equal vote, and equal (negative) freedom (in a sense that no class, group of people, or whatever would have legal privileges over another.)

Yes, but I think you know what I'm talking about when I say Liberal Egalitarian, I mean the more recent addition of economic equality to the whole ideology.

[The Liberated Territories]

Classical Liberalism, like all liberalism, was based on liberal egalitarianism. Defining ideas were equality under the law, equal vote, and equal (negative) freedom (in a sense that no class, group of people, or whatever would have legal privileges over another.)

Yes, but I think you know what I'm talking about when I say Liberal Egalitarian, I mean the more recent addition of economic equality to the whole ideology.

I don't see how that assumes a Liberal Collectivist mindset. If there must be a public library, than make access to these books equal, or else you limit part three of "in a sense that no class (you could probably expand it) should have legal privileges over another)" including ideology.

[Atlanticatia]

It isn't actually a tax. If you want a budget, go to Atlanticatia.

Tax- An involuntary fee levied on corporations or individuals that is enforced by a level of government in order to finance government activities.

So I guess if it's not a tax it's a voluntary contribution and can be opted out of.

It's actually a compulsory contribution to a private pension pot for the individual employee. Not to finance government.

It's a compulsory non-tax payment.

[New Werpland]

Yes, but I think you know what I'm talking about when I say Liberal Egalitarian, I mean the more recent addition of economic equality to the whole ideology.

I don't see how that assumes a Liberal Collectivist mindset. If there must be a public library, than make access to these books equal, or else you limit part three of "in a sense that no class (you could probably expand it) should have legal privileges over another)" including ideology.

But you see I'm not claiming to be Liberal in any way. The bill if anything is a little bit authoritarian.

[New Zepuha]

Tax- An involuntary fee levied on corporations or individuals that is enforced by a level of government in order to finance government activities.

So I guess if it's not a tax it's a voluntary contribution and can be opted out of.

It's actually a compulsory contribution to a private pension pot for the individual employee. Not to finance government.

It's a compulsory non-tax payment.

So... theft?

[Geilinor]

Still we should not limit the freedom of information of our people regardless of if it is controversial or not.

The bill is not limiting anyone's freedom in the least by taking these books of the government's shelves. That's like saying that not giving someone a 1,000 dollar paycheck every week is limiting their freedom. If people really wish to read Ayn Rand then they should get it from the private sector, they shouldn't be putting the cost of their reading interest onto the hardworking taxpayers.

Either you don't support public libraries at all or you don't put in ideological restrictions.

[Geilinor]

It's actually a compulsory contribution to a private pension pot for the individual employee. Not to finance government.

It's a compulsory non-tax payment.

So... theft?

No. It's similar to a tax but doesn't go to general revenues.

[New Werpland]

The bill is not limiting anyone's freedom in the least by taking these books of the government's shelves. That's like saying that not giving someone a 1,000 dollar paycheck every week is limiting their freedom. If people really wish to read Ayn Rand then they should get it from the private sector, they shouldn't be putting the cost of their reading interest onto the hardworking taxpayers.

Either you don't support public libraries at all or you don't put in ideological restrictions.

No I'm a Communitarian, I do what I want!

(You are assuming that I'm some kind of Liberal)

[Illuminination]

Add Karl Marx to the banned books list if you want people to even remotely conceive of it as a non partisan bill that isn't attempting to limit particular ideologies views because a different ideology is in power.

.... Or better yet, leave it to the municipalities to choose if they want to have a certain book.

[Collatis]

You are assuming that I'm some kind of Liberal

Considering that you are a part of the Liberal Democrats, I don't think that that is a ridiculous assumption.

[New Werpland]

Add Karl Marx to the banned books list if you want people to even remotely conceive of it as a non partisan bill that isn't attempting to limit particular ideologies views because a different ideology is in power.

.... Or better yet, leave it to the municipalities to choose if they want to have a certain book.

Karl Marx, although we all know his ideas failed, was not actually stupid, he was able to read Hegel which is a major achievement in itself. And if we left it to the municipalities they might go about banning something good. Anyway the point of this is to ban radical idiots on both sides, I already banned Bill Ayers a silly leftist hippie guy, I will ban any other leftist if we can prove that he or she is stupid enough.

[Ubstijan]

Wait, are we taking the book-banning think seriously now?

[Great Nepal]

Wait, are we taking the book-banning think seriously now?

I am pretty sure that is a joke... or at least I am desperately hoping it is.

[Ubstijan]

Wait, are we taking the book-banning think seriously now?

I am pretty sure that is a joke... or at least I am desperately hoping it is.

I'm going to treat it as such. The National Library/Senate Library idea I like though. I think it'd be an excellent way to foster scholarship in Calaverde.

[New Werpland]

Wait, are we taking the book-banning think seriously now?

I am pretty sure that is a joke... or at least I am desperately hoping it is.

It isn't book banning, it's making sure that filth isn't on the government's shelves. If people really do not like the bill I can come up with something else.

[Ubstijan]

It isn't book banning, it's making sure that filth isn't on the government's shelves. If people really do not like the bill I can come up with something else.

Ok, assuming you aren't being facetious, no bill banning books is going to be acceptable.