[DRAFT] Nationalisation of Casinos

[Tectium]

And this one too

This resolution states that countries should create a State Funded Casino chain that ensures that all profits will go back into the pockets of its citizens. This act will RESTRICT gambling to being a state-owned industry. This also OUTLAWS privately owned casinos.

Therefore,

CLARIFYING that Gambling should be administered by the state

STATES that Casinos are NOT A DETRIMENT to the population but if nationalised will be FOR the population

OBLIGES countries to set up state funded and owned casinos

FURTHER CLARIFIES that countries will use THE MONEY GAMBLED to better reform and expand social programs like health, education and transportation

CLEARLY STATES that all profits WILL and MUST go to the national budget.

REQUIRES countries to buy out privately owned casinos and regulate gambling in the newly created national casinos

HEREBY states that Casinos must be a state sponsored industry

[Frisbeeteria]

Split from Illegal proposals thread.

[Araraukar]

And this one too

This resolution states that countries should create a State Funded Casino chain that ensures that all profits will go back into the pockets of its citizens. This act will RESTRICT gambling to being a state-owned industry. This also OUTLAWS privately owned casinos.

Therefore,

CLARIFYING that Gambling should be administered by the state

STATES that Casinos are NOT A DETRIMENT to the population but if nationalised will be FOR the population

OBLIGES countries to set up state funded and owned casinos

FURTHER CLARIFIES that countries will use THE MONEY GAMBLED to better reform and expand social programs like health, education and transportation

CLEARLY STATES that all profits WILL and MUST go to the national budget.

REQUIRES countries to buy out privately owned casinos and regulate gambling in the newly created national casinos

HEREBY states that Casinos must be a state sponsored industry

OOC: Can nations still ban casinos entirely under this?

[Tinfect]

OOC:
Even if you put all proceeds from Casinos straight into the national Welfare budget, you're still siphoning money out of vulnerable, often poor, people, and the vast majority of it, will not go to them, or to their problems of addiction or desperation that lead them to the casino in the first place.

You'd get much more done by outlawing them outright, raising taxes, and removing the middleman of scamming the poor out of their money in the first place.

[Tinfect]

I strongly reject this, too fascist, AND could be commie.

fuck both.

OOC:
You literally do not know what either of those words mean.

[Tinfect]

I do actually.

OOC:
Mate. I run a literal Fascist State here in the WA. And OOCly, I'm a Communist. You don't know what you're talking about.

Nationalization of the casinos, which the government directly or indirectly controls.
That is fascist, if they do it through government-funded oligarchs,

Here's a link for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany
Read it.
A relevant portion you may wish to take in properly:

When Adolf Hitler became Chancellor in 1933, he introduced policies aimed at improving the economy. The changes included privatization of state industries, autarky, and tariffs on imports.

I don't know about Casinos in particular, but I suspect they would either be prohibited as a means of limiting social degeneracy, or left the fuck alone, depending on whether or not the leaders of the fascist state in question frequent said casinos.

or communist/socialist-they aren't the same I know but despise both and referring more china, gorbachev's ussr, etc. than how communism is envisioned- if done directly.

Communist and Socialist, are generally interchangeable; Communism and Socialism, aren't really. The USSR was certainly not a Communist State, to the extent that the term has any meaning; and let's not even pretend about China.

You don't know what you're talking about.

[Tinfect]

I used to be a socialist before becoming anti-socialist,

OOC:
Good for you. If your posts, including this one, are demonstrative of what you thought Socialism was, then I suspect your understanding was not particularly depthful.

and study fascism in particular to understand it and it's appeal to fight it.

Not very well, apparently, since you seem to be under the impression that Privatization and Nationalization are the same thing.

Privatization was usually done under indirect state control, however.

If, by that, you mean that formerly state-controlled operations were handed off to political allies as bargaining chips and rewards for service.

Fascism did try to control businesses, though indirectly, while keeping privatization. I'm assuming this bill does a similar thing,

It literally says Nationalization.

the bill I feel isn't exactly how things would go, such a thing would be extremely difficult for a government to do directly, so am assuming indirect means like how Fascism did things.

The draft says Nationalization; you can't just decide that words mean whatever you want.

And yes I know they aren't interchangeable, I was using how America calls the USSR, regardless of historical accuracy, I'm American so am just using that because it's just eh, enjoyable to partake in, kind of a cultural imprint.

I'm also an American, congratulations.

It doesn't change the ultimate fact that this is tyrannical, impractical, and horribly proposed, it needs a lot more details.

Tyrannical, no; Tyrannical would be rounding up and hanging all Casino owners in the country. This legislation literally requires Government buyouts; which if my understanding of standing legislation is correct, must be done at market-rate. Impractical, certainly, and generally bad legislation, of course.

[Araraukar]

Communist and Socialist, are generally interchangeable

OOC: So totally are not. At least on this side of the Atlantic Ocean.

[Tinfect]

Communist and Socialist, are generally interchangeable

OOC: So totally are not. At least on this side of the Atlantic Ocean.

OOC:
You'll have to explain mate, via TG or something, if only to avoid clogging up the thread.

1: I actually did, but it was 2015 so not gonna go all the way back for something this petty.
2: It is tyrannical, nationalization of such is tyrannical and awful.
3: You're a socialist though. Commie.
Yes, communism isn't socialism nor vice-versa, but it doesn't change the fact americans called socialists communists in the ussr, so I have no issue continuing that tradition for a non-serious comment in which I am making a countryballs usa reference, but for deep intellectual debate, I'd be using it differently. so please don't get on me for that.
4: State Capitalism in China is just a hybrid of socialism and capitalism, but I consider China closer to Fascism than socialism or capitalism. Though I have an issue with pure Capitalism, I'm not a right winger, not a conservative or libertarian.
4: Again, nationalization can be done directly or indirectly, that's why I said commie or fascist.
I predict it will be pursued in different ways, so it seems appropriate.

Christ.

[Kenmoria]

"What is the category and strength of this proposal? Also, this simply won't work. Kenmoria is opposed to literally declaring an entire sector of the economy illegal when done privately."

[Christian Democrats]

I think it's impossible to make this proposal legal.

General Assembly Resolution #68
National Economic Freedoms

REQUIRES that no commerce be generally restricted by the WA unless:

1. Restricted by prior legislation, or
2. The enterprise causes an extreme hazard to national populations

This proposal entirely undercuts itself. First of all, its preamble says: "Casinos are NOT A DETRIMENT to the population." Something that is not a detriment cannot be "an extreme hazard." Second, if casinos were "an extreme hazard," you would ban them or strictly regulate them. You wouldn't nationalize them and promote them to people as a source of revenue.

[Araraukar]

OOC: So totally are not. At least on this side of the Atlantic Ocean.

OOC: You'll have to explain mate, via TG or something, if only to avoid clogging up the thread.

OOC: Like you said, socialism =/= communism. Similarly, socialist =/= communist.

But like CD and Banana have already marked the proposal as, it contradicts NEF pretty obviously. One of the few cases where anything can contradict NEF anymore...

[Tectium]

So any thoughts?

What should I change if anything?

[Jebslund]

So any thoughts?

What should I change if anything?

I think it's impossible to make this proposal legal.

General Assembly Resolution #68
National Economic Freedoms

REQUIRES that no commerce be generally restricted by the WA unless:

1. Restricted by prior legislation, or
2. The enterprise causes an extreme hazard to national populations

This proposal entirely undercuts itself. First of all, its preamble says: "Casinos are NOT A DETRIMENT to the population." Something that is not a detriment cannot be "an extreme hazard." Second, if casinos were "an extreme hazard," you would ban them or strictly regulate them. You wouldn't nationalize them and promote them to people as a source of revenue.

"What is the category and strength of this proposal? Also, this simply won't work. Kenmoria is opposed to literally declaring an entire sector of the economy illegal when done privately."

Putting this here because these posts may have gotten lost in the arguing.

[First Nightmare]

It's not impossible to make the proposal legal. All you need to do is to repeal National Economic Freedoms first.

[Kenmoria]

It's not impossible to make the proposal legal. All you need to do is to repeal National Economic Freedoms first.

(OOC: That's a lot easier said than done. NEF is a very difficult piece of legislation to repeal as the replacement would have to be extremely good and the resolution has a lot of support. Even if NEF were repealed, the replacement might still stop this proposal from going anywhere.)

[Alcohol Nation]

All Casinos in Alcohol Nation are under The Presidents control. That's how it will stay. Alcohol Nation will NOT be told what to do. I will NEVER allow it. Our military will break it off in anyone that breaks our country's federal laws. I am beginning construction on a surrounding border wall. Signed.... President Percocet. posting.php?mode=smilies&f=9

[Kenmoria]

All Casinos in Alcohol Nation are under The Presidents control. That's how it will stay. Alcohol Nation will NOT be told what to do. I will NEVER allow it. Our military will break it off in anyone that breaks our country's federal laws. I am beginning construction on a surrounding border wall. Signed.... President Percocet. posting.php?mode=smilies&f=9

"If all casinos are under your president's control, that counts as nationalisation. Also, not being in the WA would be the appropriare reaction if the government of your country wants to protect national sovereignty."

[Omicron Convenience IV]

You can't nationalize casinos. One of the species in our empire, the Casinogrubbers, live in them due to both a cultural need and a biological need to have freedom away from the state. They would revolt if this happened.

[Araraukar]

"If all casinos are under your president's control, that counts as nationalisation."

OOC: Not really if Trump the president owns them as a private person or through privately owned corporation.