[Passed] Repeal "Safety in Difficult Times"

[FreeWillToAll]

Since it seem inevitable thatSafety in Difficult Times will did pass, I have written up a repeal. Keep in mind this is my first resolution and might not be up to par so I would appreciate any suggestions.

Proposal Submitted

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #156: Safety in Difficult Times (Category: Social Justice; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The World Assembly,

OBSERVING the need to provide safety nets and protection in Difficult Times.

APPLAUDING all countries that are and have been providing welfare to persons located in their jurisdiction.

REALIZING not all countries have the resources to do so; especially in hard economic times.

FRIGHTENED, that this may force nations to raise taxes, which may cripple already struggling economies.

CONCERNED that this resolution has many loopholes that may be abused, and such abuse, and the oversight needed to catch offenders, will cost nations even more money that they may not have.

NOTING, ''Safety in Difficult Times'' specifies that unemployment benefits be given to those involuntarily unemployed. It does allow for those involuntarily unemployed due to being fired for incompetence, among many other reasons one may be fired. This leaves a loophole open for those who are unwilling to work to cause themselves to be fired and receive benefits.

ADDITIONALLY NOTING, bereavement clause is unneeded and will be abused by those not interested in working. For example; A middle aged citizen whose father or mother died could take a whole year's vacation paid by the government. In reality, while the loss of a loved one is a terrible thing, it does not require a person to be out of work for any significant length of time.

FURTHER NOTING, This resolution requires the dispensation of funds when one gives birth to a child or adopts one (See Parental Leave Section 4). For one, there is no specified length of time for the benefits to last. Secondly, there is nothing stating that the new parents must keep the child. Thirdly, there is nothing regarding cases of neglect.

WORRIES about the provisions of section 5b); ''Pensions for survivors who are minors shall last until they have attained a basic education and are able to work''. This is a very lengthy time for anyone to receive benefits. This would basically allow the child's guardian to live off the government dime the entire time since the provision states that benefits must be enough to provide for housing, food, utilities, and schooling costs. There is no reason that a child's guardian could not obtain work in a reasonable amount of time. Single parents of divorce do it every day.

REALIZES this is an attempt at international welfare, which each member nation is capable of seeing to themselves if they are able and willing. Many have them already, which makes this resolution redundant. Not only this, but such a Socialist piece of legislation is an ideology; something which member states are prohibited to force on others, as the rights and duties of World Assembly states declares.

ADDITIONALLY NOTING, due to the cultural and societal differences in all of the countries in the World Assembly, welfare is an issue that must be solved domestically and crafted to the specific needs and wants of the target population and through.

RESOLVES, that the ''Safety in Difficult Times'' resolution is poorly worded, ambiguous, and addresses an issue that should be resolved domestically.

HEREBY REPEALS ''Safety in Difficult Times

[Monikian WA Mission]

"Monkiah will support this repeal. Mainly because it has the word 'repeal' in the name, and we hate the welfare-stateist drivel in the proposal that is likely to pass."

[Motuka]

While we are equally opposed to Safety in Difficult Times, this repeal is not strong enough to stand. A superior argument would invoke the right of national self-determination, the lack of provision for welfare fraud, the costs this would place upon a national government and negative consequences thereof, et cetera.

- S.K.

[The Left-Libertarian Hippies]

NO! This is one of the best things the WA has done...no, no, and NOOOOOOOOOO!

[FreeWillToAll]

While we are equally opposed to Safety in Difficult Times, this repeal is not strong enough to stand. A superior argument would invoke the right of national self-determination, the lack of provision for welfare fraud, the costs this would place upon a national government and negative consequences thereof, et cetera.

- S.K.

Issue addressed in new draft.

NO! This is one of the best things the WA has done...no, no, and NOOOOOOOOOO!

Although it does solve the economic issues of some, it does it incorrectly and does not address issues of abuse. Since there is no way to amend a resolution it must be repealed and amended and then resubmitted.

[Sionis Prioratus]

No, thank you.

[Unibot II]

No. *stamps 'no' on a page*

[Moronist Decisions]

FURTHER NOTING, This resolution requires the dispensation of funds when one gives birth to a child or adopts one (See Parental Leave Section 4). This will lead to child neglect due to the fact that once a child has been adopted this resolution does not force the guardian to take care of the child, nor does it provide for measures that would alleviate this concern.

I shall point out that The Child Protection Act has already dealt with the potential of lack of care.

ADDITIONALLY, Section III, Article 10 of “Rights and Duties of WA States” (Resolution #2), declares that “the World Assembly as a body maintains neutrality in matters of civil and international strife”.

ADDITIONALLY NOTING, Although membership in the World Assembly is a choice, its purpose is to insure peace and tranquility among the many countries in the world. It's purpose is not to dissolve the sovereignty of the member states. Due to the cultural and societal differences in all of the countries in the World Assembly, this issue must be solved domestically and crafted to the specific needs and wants of the target population and through.

How is this relevant??

Word count?

[Arivali]

Again, if you are concerned with social welfare, deal with it in your own country! Last I knew, the WA was an alliance of people coming together for the common good; not an international government. The stupid proposal is forced Socialism, and I am not a Socialist. I will either help repeal this fluffy feel good drivel, or I will be forced to abuse the hell out of the loopholes (which there are quite a few).

It doesn't say how long many of the benefits should last. The unemployment one is spelled out, but what about those who get fired for incompetence? I don't think stupidity and incompetence deserve to be rewarded.

But what about the rest? When a child is born/adopted, do we have to pay benefits until the kid graduates college? Or bereavement; exactly how long should bereavement last? It gives a length of time for minors, but that could be an awfully long time. If the child is a baby, the person caring for that child will be suckling from the government for a very long time. It doesn't say anything about adult dependents though. I guess that's up to the Lords and I to decide.

[FreeWillToAll]

FURTHER NOTING, This resolution requires the dispensation of funds when one gives birth to a child or adopts one (See Parental Leave Section 4). This will lead to child neglect due to the fact that once a child has been adopted this resolution does not force the guardian to take care of the child, nor does it provide for measures that would alleviate this concern.

I shall point out that The Child Protection Act has already dealt with the potential of lack of care.

ADDITIONALLY, Section III, Article 10 of “Rights and Duties of WA States” (Resolution #2), declares that “the World Assembly as a body maintains neutrality in matters of civil and international strife”.

ADDITIONALLY NOTING, Although membership in the World Assembly is a choice, its purpose is to insure peace and tranquility among the many countries in the world. It's purpose is not to dissolve the sovereignty of the member states. Due to the cultural and societal differences in all of the countries in the World Assembly, this issue must be solved domestically and crafted to the specific needs and wants of the target population and through.

How is this relevant??

Word count?

Right now I am in the drafting stage... so some things are too wordy... and if you notice there is kinda two points in the resolution, i will most likely make it half its size at the end.

[Aetrina]

My government would support this if the need arises. We would also like to congratulate the author on his first draft of a resolution.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Last I knew, the WA was an alliance of people coming together for the common good

Exactly.

Yours,

[Knootoss]

We will support a repeal of the socialist dreck that is currently being shoved down our throats by the lemming vote.


Ambassador Aram Koopman
World Assembly representative for the Dutch Democratic Republic of Knootoss

[Arivali]

Last I knew, the WA was an alliance of people coming together for the common good

Exactly.

Yours,

You cut my quote short... The other half was that the WA is not an international government, but it seems a lot of people are trying to turn it into one. Honestly, what is it with all the proposals of things that can be taken care of at a national level much more efficiently?

[Burton Industries]

"Monkiah Burton Industries will support this repeal. Mainly because it has the word 'repeal' in the name, and we hate the welfare-stateist drivel in the proposal that is likely to pass."

My thoughts exactly.

[Corumm]

It might need polishing but it is an adequate response to the socialist encroachment upon the rights of national governments.

[Romivul WA Mission]

The Republic of Romivul shall support this repeal. The ''Safety in Difficult Times'' bill imply that the WA has the right to mandate nations welfare programs which is completely beyond their jurisdiction. We shall fight for this bill to be repealed.

[Dilsnufi]

Yes

[Romivul WA Mission]

We feel the ''Safety In Difficult Times'' resolution also violates Article 3 Section 1 of the ''Rights and Duties of WA States'' resolution passed some time ago.

''Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.''

[Separatist Peoples]

With some refining, I believe we could support this. Safety in Difficult Times was well written, but we would much rather see it repealed. This is legislation that, we believe, would be best suited at a national level.

[Gernonai]

Again, if you are concerned with social welfare, deal with it in your own country! Last I knew, the WA was an alliance of people coming together for the common good; not an international government. The stupid proposal is forced Socialism, and I am not a Socialist. I will either help repeal this fluffy feel good drivel, or I will be forced to abuse the hell out of the loopholes (which there are quite a few).

It doesn't say how long many of the benefits should last. The unemployment one is spelled out, but what about those who get fired for incompetence? I don't think stupidity and incompetence deserve to be rewarded.

But what about the rest? When a child is born/adopted, do we have to pay benefits until the kid graduates college? Or bereavement; exactly how long should bereavement last? It gives a length of time for minors, but that could be an awfully long time. If the child is a baby, the person caring for that child will be suckling from the government for a very long time. It doesn't say anything about adult dependents though. I guess that's up to the Lords and I to decide.

I agree, this act doesnt need to be passed, and if it is passed, it should be repealed immediately. Governments should be able to deal with welfare on their own terms, and if they cant, then thats their problem.

[Romivul WA Mission]

The Republic of Romivul wishes to call to attention the fact that ''Safety in Difficult Times'' act violates two major articles of the ''Rights and Duties of WA States'' resolution. Section I: Article 2 says:

'' Every WA Member State has the right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and over all persons and things therein, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.''

In other words, the WA has no right to force a nation into providing welfare for it's people.

Article 1 § Every WA Member State has the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government.


This part states that every WA nation has independence and cannot be forced into providing welfare. It also states that if their form of government is an anti-welfare capitalist one then the WA has no right to force them to do otherwise which the ''Safety in Difficult Times'' act would do.

[Kommenori]

It will be quite difficult to repeal 'Safety in Difficult Times' judging by the margin of support the whole thing seems to have in the WA.
Nonetheless we support this initiative.

[Dilsnufi]

We feel the ''Safety In Difficult Times'' resolution also violates Article 3 Section 1 of the ''Rights and Duties of WA States'' resolution passed some time ago.

''Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.''

Here, Here!

[Arivali]

Repeal Safety In Difficult Times
Category: Repeal

Repeal “Safety in Difficult Times”

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #156: Safety in Difficult Times (Category: Social Justice; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

OBSERVING the need to provide safety nets and protection in Difficult Times.

APLAUDING all countries that are and have been providing welfare to persons located in their jurisdiction.

REALIZING not all countries have the resources to do so; especially in hard economic times.

NOTING, It specifies that unemployment benefits be given to those involuntarily unemployed. It does not mention those involuntarily unemployed due to being fired for incompetence, among many other reasons one may be fired. This leaves a loophole open for those who are unwilling to work to cause themselves to be fired and receive benefits.
ALSO NOTING the bereavement clause is unneeded. While the loss of a loved one is a terrible thing, it does not require an able-bodied person to be out of work for any significant amount of time. Therefore, benefits to not need to be given.

WORRIES about section 5b;Pensions for survivors who are minors. It states that benefits shall last until they have attained a basic education and are able to work. This is a very long time for anyone to receive benefits, especially if the surviving dependant is a young child at the time of the parent’s death. This would allow the child’s guardian to live off the government dime for the child’s entire life, and not be a productive member of society. There is no reason the child’s guardian could not obtain work in a reasonable amount of time.
ARGUES this is an attempt at international welfare, which each member nation is capable of seeing to themselves if they are able and willing. Many have them already, which renders this resolution redundant.
FRIGHTENED that the costs of resolution # 156 may force nations to raise taxes, which may cripple already struggling economies.


ADDITIONALLY, Article 3 of WA resolution #2 “Rights and Duties of WA States”; “Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.”
Article 1 § Every WA Member State has the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government.
RESOLVES that the “Safety in Difficult Times” resolution is poorly worded, ambiguous, full of loopholes that can be abused, and addresses an issue that should be resolved domestically.

HEREBY REPEALS “Safety in Difficult Times”

How's this?