[PASSED] Don't Kill the Poor Act

[Arasi Luvasa]

The United Free States of America Strongly opposes this proposal due to the fact that state-sanctioned elimination of certain groups or individuals that are Parasites to the state, for example, liberals/millennials that don't work and leech on welfare, these groups need to be eliminated so they don't sink the economy.

- United Free States Of America

"So just kill off your entire future working force, great job that was so smart. If someone refuses to work, I believe current legislation permits you to not subsidize their sloth so your argument seems more like a baby whining that they cannot just up and murder whoever they want."

[Freepublican]

Requires member states to render aid to individuals escaping genocide on the basis of their economic status or employment, and to consider such persons refugees.

I am not changing my immigration laws. All individuals must be vetted. I will vote against. (Not that it really matters at this point.)

[Caracasus]

Requires member states to render aid to individuals escaping genocide on the basis of their economic status or employment, and to consider such persons refugees.

I am not changing my immigration laws. All individuals must be vetted. I will vote against. (Not that it really matters at this point.)

Aid ambassador.

That doesn't mean you have to let in those scary traumatized families fleeing mass murder. It could mean providing food, water and medical supplies or chartering a boat to take them to a nation slightly less petrified of a group of malnourished children, for instance.

[Ragnaria]

Proposal seems totally reasonable, voted yes.

[United Catholic Districts]

This name is too generic

[Kenmoria]

Requires member states to render aid to individuals escaping genocide on the basis of their economic status or employment, and to consider such persons refugees.

I am not changing my immigration laws. All individuals must be vetted. I will vote against. (Not that it really matters at this point.)

(OOC: If this passes, your immigration laws would ideally change to reflect that new piece of legislation. You could choose not to do that, but it is important to noncomply in ways that take into account GA resolutions about noncompliance. Also, this proposal doesn’t even require you to let people fleeing genomics into your nation anyway, just that aid is provided. As there are no qualifiers, said aid could just be providing water bottles to the thirsty.)

[A Cornstar]

We will comply (as this resolution is set to pass) by means of enforcing sectors according to ethnicity. This may lead to more wars but We understand an undignified peace is a death that is worse than to simply die in the flesh.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Truth be told, the only reason this resolution has even a fraction of the support it currently enjoys is because of its admittedly catchy, but utterly nondescriptive title. Just another terrible resolution that looks set to be passed by the General Assembly.

[Lord Dominator]

Truth be told, the only reason this resolution has even a fraction of the support it currently enjoys is because of its admittedly catchy, but utterly nondescriptive title. Just another terrible resolution that looks set to be passed by the General Assembly.

Or perhaps, people in general and the large regions in particular have determined that the proposal is a good one.

[Caracasus]

Truth be told, the only reason this resolution has even a fraction of the support it currently enjoys is because of its admittedly catchy, but utterly nondescriptive title. Just another terrible resolution that looks set to be passed by the General Assembly.

It's a very sensible, well crafted resolution that closes an unfortunate loophole in existing resolutions on the subject seamlessly. The catchy title sure helps too, but it'd likely pass without.

[Separatist Peoples]

"I'm not sure what the big deal is here. We have a law on genocide that is not exclusive. This proposal fills a gap in the non-exclusive law on genocide. I agree that I cant think of a single reason why a nation would exterminate the poor, but nor do I see why genocide is ever a genuine choice.

"Legislative bodies exist to write new laws but also to review shortcomings of old ones. That's what the delegation from Wallenburg did. Let's not make it into a bad thing."

[Ru-]

Truth be told, the only reason this resolution has even a fraction of the support it currently enjoys is because of its admittedly catchy, but utterly nondescriptive title. Just another terrible resolution that looks set to be passed by the General Assembly.

We disagree. We saw the title first and our view on the resolution was very negative, then we saw the author and (with our apologies to them) that didn't really help matters. Then we actually read the resolution and voted in favor.

The unprofessional title is very unfortunate, but the body of a resolution is what really matters and this is a solid, well written resolution that deserves our support. Whether you like it or not there was a loophole in our previous resolutions on these subjects and it needed to be addressed. This resolution does so quite painlessly.

[HerpDeDerp]

We will comply (as this resolution is set to pass) by means of enforcing sectors according to ethnicity. This may lead to more wars but We understand an undignified peace is a death that is worse than to simply die in the flesh.

You are a genius! We were going to leave the WA after this, but now we have a solution.

[Wallenburg]

We will comply (as this resolution is set to pass) by means of enforcing sectors according to ethnicity. This may lead to more wars but We understand an undignified peace is a death that is worse than to simply die in the flesh.

You are a genius! We were going to leave the WA after this, but now we have a solution.

*cough*

[United Free States of America]

The United Free States of America Strongly opposes this proposal due to the fact that state-sanctioned elimination of certain groups or individuals that are Parasites to the state, for example, liberals/millennials that don't work and leech on welfare, these groups need to be eliminated so they don't sink the economy.

- United Free States Of America

"So just kill off your entire future working force, great job that was so smart. If someone refuses to work, I believe current legislation permits you to not subsidize their sloth so your argument seems more like a baby whining that they cannot just up and murder whoever they want."

That's the complete opposite of what I meant this proposal doesn't allow a nation to continue population control programs to ensure their resources aren't exhausted on undesirable citizens that don't contribute to the gene pool or society as a whole. For example, this proposal doesn't go into detail about what to do with the physically/mentally disabled when it's no longer viable to continue care? Are we supposed to dump them in the streets or humanely end their pain? Also, we are supposed to let in refugees that we don't know anything about, they could be a threat to national security or should we let these refugees take advantage of our welfare programs and not work? No thanks, these type of matters should be the responsibility of a nation alone without interference so we can continue to make our nations great.

[Renolia]

Wouldn't "forceful isolation of a group in designated areas" qualify something like using the police to enforce laws regarding designated smoking areas to be considered "genocide"?

Similarly, "removal of a group from designated areas" could consider the enforcement of laws regarding usage of sex-specific public bathrooms to be "genocide" against, for example, men who attempt to enter female bathrooms.

[Arasi Luvasa]

"So just kill off your entire future working force, great job that was so smart. If someone refuses to work, I believe current legislation permits you to not subsidize their sloth so your argument seems more like a baby whining that they cannot just up and murder whoever they want."

That's the complete opposite of what I meant this proposal doesn't allow a nation to continue population control programs to ensure their resources aren't exhausted on undesirable citizens that don't contribute to the gene pool or society as a whole. For example, this proposal doesn't go into detail about what to do with the physically/mentally disabled when it's no longer viable to continue care? Are we supposed to dump them in the streets or humanely end their pain? Also, we are supposed to let in refugees that we don't know anything about, they could be a threat to national security or should we let these refugees take advantage of our welfare programs and not work? No thanks, these type of matters should be the responsibility of a nation alone without interference so we can continue to make our nations great.

Look at Wallenburgs last post.

[Enjuku]

Most of this resolution makes sense and we commend initiatives that try to target genocide in all its forms. We're concerned though that the term "group" is too ill-defined when contrasted with "individual", and therefore leaves too broad a gap for interpretation.

Labor disputes are especially at issue here. Line 2 defines genocide as including "removal of a group from designated areas". Line 3 makes this act committed for reasons of employment "crimes against humanity". This unnecessarily amplifies to the level of genocide any state policing or forced removal of workers on strike, staging workplace walkouts, or holding protests concerned with their employment status. This resolution fails to define the muddy area between a group and an individual in line 2.

We have here a slippery slope to issues overlooked by this resolution being upgraded to crimes against humanity. It is our sincere hope that this gap will be addressed in the near future. While we object to the bright line language in lines 2 and 3 and wish for further clarification, we nontheless will vote in favor of the resolution due to its overall recognition and concern for preventing genocide at-large.

Best regards,
Francesca Medellín
Foreign Minister for Enjuku
Enjukan Ministry of Foreign Affairs

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Don't Kill the Poor Act was passed 14,051 votes to 3,344

[A Cornstar]

You are a genius! We were going to leave the WA after this, but now we have a solution.

*cough*

We see no contradiction here.

[Lord Dominator]

"Congratulations ambassador on the rousing success in voting."

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Of course, the resolution has just passed in the General Assembly. Disappointing, but not unexpected.

[Kenmoria]

*cough*

We see no contradiction here.

(OOC: CoCR bans discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, and enforcing sectors according to race would be a pretty clear-cut method of discriminating on the basis of race.)

[Arasi Luvasa]

*cough*

We see no contradiction here.

Also bans discrimination based on disability if I am reading it correctly.

[A Cornstar]

Article 1, clause c)
"All inhabitants of member states have the right not to be and indeed must not be discriminated against on grounds including sex, race, ethnicity, nationality, skin color, language, economic or cultural background, physical or mental disability or condition, religion or belief system, sexual orientation or sexual identity, or any other arbitrarily assigned and reductive categorisation which may be used for the purposes of discrimination, except for compelling practical purposes, such as hiring only female staff to work with battered women who have sought refuge from their abusers."

Article 2, clause a)
"Unfair and unreasonable discrimination, on the grounds outlined in clause c) of article 1 of this resolution, in private employment, housing, education, employment benefits, compensations and access to services provided to the general public shall be prohibited by all member states."

Article 2, clause d)
"Nothing in this article shall be construed as to deny additional or stronger protections against discrimination and abuse enacted by member states."

All peoples have a right to a homeland that continues to be so.