[Draft] Homeless Act

[Evonian]

So far this is a very very rough draft and just a small idea I had. Feel free to comment or tell me to give up on it I could also use a better name lol.

Homeless Act (I need a better name)
Believes, all people in this world have the right to feel safe in a home or homelike environment.

Defines, home as a place capable for humans to be sustained in, having all needed elements including water, food, a place to sleep, and hygienic items.

Appalled, that many everyday have no such place.

Recognizes, many nations do have some forms of homeless shelter systems in place.

Requires

-Individual nations to provide homeless shelters or other "homes" for those unable to afford to maintain their own, for at least a majority of the homeless population.

-Nations to provide forms of assistance to those unable to acquire a job. Nations will establish employment agencies to help those who are interested in working receive work.

-Nations provide safe and reliable resources for the tenants of these shelters or "homes" including safe drinking water, food, sleeping areas, and hygiene supplies. All supplied to grant the tenant a basic yet comfortable way of life. Tenants will not be required to be cared for if they are not attempting to get back into working.

-The world assembly to set up a homeless protection council which will help fund these programs for struggling nations and ensure this resolution is followed.

Hoping, people of the world will have a safe place to rest their heads at night.

[Alekoslav]

Great resolution...with some improvements and editing I think I'll approve it

[Democratic Consensia]

So far this is a very very rough draft and just a small idea I had. Feel free to comment or tell me to give up on it I could also use a better name lol.

Homeless Act (I need a better name)
Believes, all people in this world have the right to feel safe in a home or homelike environment.

Defines, home as a place capable for humans to be sustained in. Poor definition, I think. Replace "humans" with persons and consider expanding the defintion. Strictly speaking, this definition makes a cave a home.

Appalled, that many everyday have no such place.

Recognizes, many nations do have some forms of homeless shelter systems in place.

Requires

-Individual nations to provide homeless shelters or other "homes" for those unable to afford to maintain their own, for at least a majority of the homeless population. This is an unfunded mandate and that will make our poorer member-states rather nervous.

-Nations to provide forms of assistance to those unable to acquire a job. Assistance includes help becoming employed and help covering living costs while unemployed.

-Nations provide safe and reliable resources for the tenants of these shelters or "homes" including safe drinking water, food, sleeping areas, and hygiene supplies.All surplied to grant the tenant a basic yet comfortable way of life.

Hoping, people of the world will have a safe place to rest their heads at night.

I think this duplicates another act, which may or may not have already been submitted and past. However, on the off chance it doesn't, I've submitted my in-line comments in red.

Generally speaking, your chief problem is a lack of definitions and specificity. Congratulations on your first proposed resolution.

Yours,

[Evonian]

Thanks! I'm open to more revision help etc guys!

[Naboompu]

-----

[Flibbleites]

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Down With the World Assembly]

This draft is illegal, because it contains an ideological ban of neo-liberalism and severly impacts national sovereignty. Moreover, this proposition is immoral.

1) Neo-liberalism is the ideology that the government should not get involved in economic affairs like but not limited to income and trade.
2) Moreover, some nations cannot afford the 'strong' nature of this act; others need to remain competitive economically with non-WA nation states.
3) Finally, why should anyone work for someone else. The purpose and incentive to work is not necessarily profit, but identity and self-gratification from living for the sake of oneself and not anyone else.

For these reasons, this proposed reform is illegal and also immoral. Hence, Naboompu is strongly opposed to this egregious infringement on national soveriengty, neo-liberalism and the freedom for individuals to live uninterrupted by freeloaders.

Of course the proposal's immoral! It is completely immoral for one group of nations to tell a smaller group of nations what to do, just because they have a majority and the smaller group was dumb enough to join the WA.

[Boomango]

I LIKE IT, I agree

[New Kesheru]

Seems okay, needs some tuning but its okay.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Hmm, we're tentatively in favour. A few problems:

Basically, what Democractic Consensia said, and on that note maybe you could also empower an International Development Bank to lend money from the General fund to pay for this for countries that are too poor?

And also, besides Category and Strength, the grammar is a bit askew in the last clause:

-Nations to provide safe and reliable resources for the tenants of these shelters or "homes" including safe drinking water, food, sleeping areas, and hygiene supplies, all surplied to grant the tenant a basic yet comfortable way of life.

[Bears Armed]

Strictly speaking, this definition makes a cave a home

Sometimes it is...

^_^

[Ujonda]

The government of Ujonda supports this bill.

[Philimbesi]

-Nations to provide forms of assistance to those unable to acquire a job. Assistance includes help becoming employed and help covering living costs while unemployed.

For how long? The USP has various employment programs that would allow citizens who are experiencing hard times to get through. This is all based on their commitment to find employment as Philimbesians feel that they should not continue to pay for someone who shows no motivation to get off the government tit.

-Nations provide safe and reliable resources for the tenants of these shelters or "homes" including safe drinking water, food, sleeping areas, and hygiene supplies.All surplied (supplied) to grant the tenant a basic yet comfortable way of life.

Minor spelling error there.

[Hirota]

This draft is illegal, because it contains an ideological ban of neo-liberalism and severly impacts national sovereignty. Moreover, this proposition is immoral.

1) Neo-liberalism is the ideology that the government should not get involved in economic affairs like but not limited to income and trade.
2) Moreover, some nations cannot afford the 'strong' nature of this act; others need to remain competitive economically with non-WA nation states.
3) Finally, why should anyone work for someone else. The purpose and incentive to work is not necessarily profit, but identity and self-gratification from living for the sake of oneself and not anyone else.

For these reasons, this proposed reform is illegal and also immoral. Hence, Naboompu is strongly opposed to this egregious infringement on national soveriengty, neo-liberalism and the freedom for individuals to live uninterrupted by freeloaders.

Utter nonsense. By very definition almost everything the WA does can and will infringe on member states economic policies by forcing the member state to comply with resolutons.- but yet not a single resolution has been struck down for being illegal for an ideological ban for expecting member states to put up funding.

The rest of yuor complaints is just your regular run of the mill moaning about NatSov, and that isn't enough to make even a half-decent argument on it's own.

[Cinistra]

The Ministry of Plenty of The Armed People's Republic of Cinistra supports this proposal. Humans are not wild beasts, free to roam the land at whim. They must reside in a permanent habitat under the strict monitoring of The State. Thus, it is our government's view that The State, and The State only, provides shelter for every individual within the territory protected by The State. Private enterprise can not be trusted this serious task, as it is only motivated by profit, and profit only. Thus, individuals without sufficient economical strength, will be excluded from the market.

[Grays Harbor]

We object to those who are employed being forced to foot the bill for those who are not, for whatever reason. If you have a job, you're on your own. But, if you make bad choices, or choose not to work, or whatever, those with jobs and money should pay for your living expenses? Yeah, real incentive to go out and become self-sufficient, because as soon as you do, you get to start paying for somebody else along with yourself. Superficial "feel good" proposals such as this are an embarrasment to the WA.

[Flibbleites]

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Evonian]

Probably Human rights as the category

[Alekoslav]

Yeah it is a Human Rights resolution for life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (unalienable rights) and I would give it a strength of 'mild'

[Frisbeeteria]

Yeah it is a Human Rights resolution for life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (unalienable rights) and I would give it a strength of 'mild'

Please note that this is not the United States, and the trio of so-called unalienable rights do not exist in WA Law.

Please read General Assembly Proposal Categories and pay attention to the descriptions, instead of simply assuming that "I think everyone should have this" is the same as "Human Rights".

[Alekoslav]

Yeah it is a Human Rights resolution for life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (unalienable rights) and I would give it a strength of 'mild'

Please note that this is not the United States, and the trio of so-called unalienable rights do not exist in WA Law.

Please read General Assembly Proposal Categories and pay attention to the descriptions, instead of simply assuming that "I think everyone should have this" is the same as "Human Rights".

Yeah but don't all Human Rights have these included or something similar?

[A mean old man]

This poor act! It is homeless!

[Democratic Consensia]

Please note that this is not the United States, and the trio of so-called unalienable rights do not exist in WA Law.

Please read General Assembly Proposal Categories and pay attention to the descriptions, instead of simply assuming that "I think everyone should have this" is the same as "Human Rights".

Yeah but don't all Human Rights have these included or something similar?

Not necessarily. Take the example of what we would call "Canada". These are the fundamental freedoms, as defined by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, an appendix to the constitution dealing with human rights:

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

That's it. Those are your inalienable rights... and none of them are life or liberty. Granted, those rights exist in other legal constructs, like the section of the Criminal Code proscribing murder... but that's not really the definition of a right?

[Frisbeeteria]

[OOC] I've always liked Colonel Dubois' answer to this question:

Robert Heinlein in Starship Troopers wrote
"Ah, yes, the 'unalienable rights.' Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die if he is to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'?

As to liberty, the heroes who signed that great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is always unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it is always vanquished. Of all the so-called 'natural human rights' that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost.

The third 'right'?—the 'pursuit of happiness'? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives—but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can ensure that I will catch it."

Back on topic, human rights are paid for with moral coin. Houses for the homeless are built with the coin of the realm. You can't simply wish homelessness out of existence by calling it a human right - somebody has to pay. Figure out who and how (and read the damn link I gave you) and you'll be on your way to category and strength.

[The Peoples Socialist Confederacy]

A similar legislation passed through my nations Parliament. As representative of The Peoples Socialist Confederacy, I fully support this and hope it be brought to a vote A.S.A.P.