Wikination
Don't have an account?
Register
Advertisement
Register
in: Forum, Congress

Forum:Second Chamber

Revision as of 07:11, 4 July 2015 by Ooswesthoesbes (talk | contribs) (→‎Comments)
View source
Seal of the Second Chamber

Seal of the Second Chamber

National Archives of the Congressional debates and votes:
1. First series
2. Second series
3. Third series
4. Fourth series
5. Fifth series
6. Sixth series
7. Seventh series
8. Eighth series
9. Ninth series
10. Tenth series
11. Eleventh series
12. Twelfth series
13. Thirteenth series
14. Fourteenth series
15. Fifteenth series
16. Sixteenth series

In Lovia, Congress is the national legislative body and the most powerful branch of government. The Second Chamber is one of the two chambers of Congress, located in the Capitol in Downtown Noble City, in which the Members of the Congress vote bills that originated in the First Chamber. Paradoxically, Lovia does not have a bicameral parliament: there is only one group of MOTCs that both debates and votes the proposals. For the current composition of Congress, see 2013 Congress.

Whereas all national citizens may propose bills in the First Chamber, only Members of the Congress may vote them in the Second Chamber. Article 6 of the Constitution states that "all Members of the Congress are expected to vote on the motion in the Second Chamber". They have three legal voting options: "pro (in favor of the motion), contra (in opposition to the motion) and abstention (the wish not to vote)." Further more, they "have two weeks’ time to cast their vote in the Second Chamber. Voting may be closed earlier if the required majority is reached. The proposer may also choose to lengthen the voting period."

A normal majority ("more than fifty percent of the valid votes") is required to pass a motion amending the Federal Law. To vote on Constitutional amendments, a special majority ("more than two thirds of the valid votes") is required to pass a amendment. The special majority requirement was lowered from three quarters to two thirds in the 2010 State Reform (Sixth Amendment). All proposals approved by Congress, by the required majority and in due time, must be implemented by the government of Lovia.

002. Hoffmann II Government

Feel free to change the names as appropriate.

The above list is my proposed government. It is designed to try and represent the spread of power in the Congress between the parties and allocate Ministries to those with the most interest in said areas and to make sure everyone has something they can focus on. This government is designed to not allow a lurch to the left or right in great degrees but to focus the best policies in the places where they are most needed at the current times.

My proposed budget will be one that aims for a minor deficit, investing in the economy to help it grow, with the intention to pay the debt off next Congress. We shall ensure low taxes on the poorest and try and raise L$2-3 billion (from the current L$8 billion in the economy) to fund government expenditure. I will ask that States do not levy taxes while we rebalance and repair the States that are in most need. We will aim to devolve spending down to Ministries and States where applicable and encourage Ministers to take an active role in allocating resources.

I will personally be introducing the following bills to Congress over the coming months as part of my main aims. They are listed in no particular order.

  • Constitutional Reform Bills
    • Congressional Reform Bill - a bill to reduce the effect of inactives on Congress
    • Second State Reform Bill - a bill to rebalance power between state and federal level
  • State Investment Fund Bill - a bill to introduce controlled economic investment by States
  • Adult Education Bill - a bill to introduce supported adult education, particularly education of the unemployed
  • Trade Disputes Bill - a bill to give unions and workers powers over their labour, and to regulate disputes
  • Health Reform Bills
    • National Health Service Bill - a bill to create a national health service, replacing state models
    • Tripartite Care Bill - a bill to ensure physical, mental and social care are integrated
  • Housing Reform Bills
    • Social Rents Bill - a bill to create a requirement for state and federal governments to provide social rents to the neediest
    • Home Building Bill - a bill to create a system of support for building, repairing and renovating homes
  • Defence Bills
    • Firearms Reform Bill - a bill to change and better regulate how firearms are controlled in Lovia
    • Militia Reform Bill - a bill to provide for greater ability to persecute insurgents and militia groups
  • Education Reform Bills
    • School Building Bill - a bill to create a system of support for building, repairing and renovating schools
    • Educational Board Reform Bill - a bill to create one universal educational board to provide official qualifications regulation

Everyone who is in Congress will obviously be able to partake in these debates, and we'll hopefully - as we have in the past - come to a reasonable conclusion on each debate and create many good laws and reforms. These bills that I will introduce do not obviously mean others cannot contribute other bills. I encourage people to come to Congress with issues or ideas so we may debate them and see if legislation is needed.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

Contra

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 11 votes HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 20:36, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • Abstention Abstention 7 votes. (This is better than the Hardy proposal, but not yet quite satisfactory. For example, I'd rather have Environment than Energy and Resources, and again the MoTaS thing.) 77topaz (talk) 20:50, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Abstention Abstention 4 votes. Traspes - Dianna Bartol LOGO POSITIVE BLOCK 23:16, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Abstention Abstention 8 votes. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:34, May 7, 2015 (UTC) (SLP: now supporting AMWM)

Declined This proposal is declined. Moot with the passing of the AMWM government. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:59, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

The final line up. I hope others make it clear what their final proposals are and move them to the second chamber as well. So that all Congressmembers can see what their choice really is. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 13:44, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

There has been a slight modification to the proposal I encourage people to vote again. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 21:49, May 6, 2015 (UTC)

004. Conroy I Government

Some minor adjustments have been made to the ministry positions. Users with more than position, feel free to change character names for spares

This is my government proposal. It is a response to calls from throughout our country for a more progressive government, and includes plans for much needed reform.

The following are the policy areas on which I wish to focus over the coming months. I seek to propose the following acts in Congress, in hope of a re-energised and vibrant Lovia.

  • State Governments Act- We seek to open a dialogue with groups from across the spectrum in order to reform how state governments work. Ultimately, our goal is for State Councils to have control over issues such as culture, language, environment and education, with the federal government taking on more responsibility for policy areas such as housing, healthcare and welfare.
  • National Healthcare Act- As mentioned above, we will legislate for a national framework of physical, mental and social healthcare, incorporating the existing state healthcare systems. We hope this will end disparity and inequality between the healthcare services of state governments.
  • Higher Education Act- We will provide further investment in our universities, and open a discussion on tuition fees, with the aim of abolishing them, or at the very least putting a cap on them. This act will also promote higher vocational education and work-based training
  • Housing Act- We will seek to resolve problems with housing across Lovia, with a system of social housing, and increased federal investment in homebuilding.

In addition, I will also seek to implement minor legislation in the following policy areas:

  • Minor amendments to Primary and Secondary Education Acts- Creation of Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) to guarantee high standards of teaching in all Lovian schools
  • Support for working families- We will introduce childcare vouchers to ensure that parents of young children are able to balance work with their family life. We will also consider a system of paid parental leave for new parents, to be shared between both parents.

This vision for a better Lovia brings a fresh perspective to the table. This vision seeks to address the causes of inequality and conflict in our country, and is a fairer deal for all.

We hope this plan for stable leadership will provide for a more prosperous, progressive Lovia that all citizens can benefit from- Frijoles333 TALK 16:50, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 11 votes HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 20:36, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
  • ...
  • ...

Contra

  • Contra Contra 10 votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:25, May 5, 2015 (UTC) (CPL.nm: Excludes CPL.nm; SLP: Inexperienced PM)
  • Contra Contra (15 votes) --OuWTB 08:55, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • ...
  • ...

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 7 votes (similar ideas, but of course, as you posted on mine, we both understand) Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 17:34, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • ...
  • ...

Declined This proposal is declined. Withdrawn. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:30, May 6, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

I've made a few minor tweaks to the final ministry line up, but the bulk of my plans remain unchanged- Frijoles333 TALK 16:50, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

Seriously Time? You're voting against this because of the absence of the CPL.nm? They aren't represented by an active user, and never requested any positions. It seems you're looking for any excuse NOT to support me :o Frijoles333 TALK 19:42, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
And because of the inexperience, and because I only have one ministry (Speaker does not count). :o —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:58, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
You might be in a more favorable position, with more ministries, had you shown a little more support. There were others who wanted Education by the way, but I still gave it to you because I know you're interested in that issue :o Frijoles333 TALK 20:02, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
Good thing your gov is getting voted down :o —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:25, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
In the grand scheme of things, I don't think you voting down my government is going to have a huge effect on the overall result :o Frijoles333 TALK 20:50, May 5, 2015 (UTC)
CNP, CCPL, and probably Viva are all not in support. Plus, TM001 is inactive. :o —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:54, May 5, 2015 (UTC)

005. Hardy I Government

  • PM:
    • Neil Hardy (Happy)
  • Agriculture:
    • George Wrexley (TM001)
  • Commerce:
    • Bart Koenen (Bart K)
  • Culture:
    • Arthur Sythey (Sithlent)
  • Defence:
    • Lukas Hoffmann (Kunarian)
  • Education:
    • William Krosby (Time)
  • Energy and resources:
    • Rakham Tarik Al-Asmari (Viva)
  • Environment:
    • Bart Koenen (Bart)
  • Social Affairs:
    • Katie Konroy (Frijoles)
  • Family, youth and elderly:
    • Oos Wes Ilava (Oos)
  • Finance:
    • William Krosby (Time)
  • Foreign affairs:
    • Aina Sarria (Traspes)
  • Health:
    • Justin Abrahams (Horton)
  • Justice:
    • Charles Jones (4kant)
  • Labour:
    • Justin Abrahams (Horton)
  • Minorities:
    • Martijn Mans (Martijn)
  • Tourism and sport:
    • Nicholas Sheraldin (Topaz)
  • Transportation:
    • Oos Wes Ilava (Oos)
  • Science:
    • Anna-Maria Whitdonck-Malsky (Semyon)
  • Speaker of the Congress:
    • Nicolas Sheraldin (Topaz)

The proposed Hardy I Government would look to create an active and stable congress, including parties from across the spectrum. We feel it is necessary to create a National Health Service, replacing the current system, whereby not all states currently have an active health service. We look to work closely with proposed Minister of Education William Krosby, creating a national education board and providing funds to renovate poor schools. We also look to reduce the effect of inactive members of the congress by creating an edit criteria in the terms of congress members. We look to protect minority languages and culture and teach minority languages in late primary, secondary and tertiary education. We look to impose Animal protection laws, and make sure animal cruelty will be punished.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro (15 votes) --OuWTB 20:41, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro (7 votes) Happy65 20:42, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  •  (2 votes) Sithlent (talk) 21:00, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Contra

  • Contra Contra 10 votes (CCPL as PM, two T&S ministers?) —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:11, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 7 votes (Me and Hardy do have a couple of ideas in common, but I can't vote for a CCPL government) Frijoles333 TALK 17:22, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 7 votes. (See TM and Frijoles' comments. Though I have to commend this for being the only proposal with me as at least half the MoTaS. :P) 77topaz (talk) 20:42, May 6, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 11 votes HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 14:18, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Declined This proposal is declined. Moot with the passing of the AMWM government. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:59, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

006. AMWM I Government

My government will pursue a socialist course. See my manifesto for more details.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro (6 votes) --Semyon 21:49, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro (10 votes) needs more positions for Semyon, though —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:51, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes Frijoles333 TALK 22:05, May 6, 2015 (UTC) (I already pledged support for Hoffmann's proposal, but now I'm liking this new proposal. I will keep pro votes up for both for the time being)
  • Pro Pro 1 Vote Miroslav Znalic 23:18, May 6, 2015 (UTC) (For the first step towards the truly emancipatory collective!)
  • Pro Pro 5 votes Traspes - Dianna Bartol LOGO POSITIVE BLOCK 23:39, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. 77topaz (talk) 01:32, May 7, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 11 votes. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 13:17, May 7, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro (3 votes) The Xania Encyclopedia Wiki Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 14:45, May 8, 2015 (UTC) (I had a change of heart. :P)
  • Pro Pro Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 17:58, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Contra

  • Contra Contra (15 votes) --OuWTB 21:50, May 6, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention (3 votes) The Xania Encyclopedia Wiki Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:10, May 7, 2015 (UTC) (I'd prefer to be Minister of Justice. No one wanted the position, and I feel that it is more fitting for a man of Rakham's stature.)

Accepted This proposal is accepted! By at least a 51% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:19, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

Four more votes needed to pass. I hope to see the CNP, Wrexley's branch of the UL, and Asmari's branch of GP supporting this in order to create the best progress Lovia has had in a long time! --William Krosby 13:20, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

The CNP shall not be backing this. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 16:09, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

I am sadified by that. I suppose we will be better off without anti-progress politicians, though. --William Krosby 16:13, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Once Semyon revotes, we will have 50 votes Pro. Does anyone object to waiving the two week requirement of waiting before enshrinement, due to the fact that 4 of the MOTCS who have not yet voted will far more likely than not vote Pro, making a majority against impossible? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:35, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

That's not a majority. A majority is 51. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 17:57, May 8, 2015 (UTC)
Yes, but the Constitution says that you only need a majority of valid votes after two weeks. But we have a majority now, almost. :o —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:43, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

I hereby declare the Whithdonck-Malsky I Government inaugurated. This is a historic moment for progress in this country, and I congratulate all of those involved. --Isabella Munson 20:19, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

I thank the Lovian people and their congress for their support. Let those who oppress the poor, those who view women as inferior, and those who promulgate ethnic tension throughout this land shake in fear. Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 20:35, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

007. Action against Burenia

Burenia has begun a devastating program of ethnic cleansing against the Kob minority. I propose that Lovia formally condemn these actions, cut all economic ties with Burenia and commit to accepting an unlimited number of Kob refugees.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 7 votes --Semyon 16:23, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 10 votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:29, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 15 votes --OuWTB 18:38, May 19, 2015 (UTC) Gotta act as Oos Wes Ilava here. My Burenian version disagrees though :o
    • I commend Mr. Ilava for his bravery in defying the powerful Burenian lobby which I know exerts great influence over CCPL. --Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 20:02, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 21:00, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. 77topaz (talk) 01:29, May 20, 2015 (UTC)

Contra

  • Contra Contra We are in the middle of our own economic crisis, many people in this country need immediate help, the government has done nothing. And now you suggest we accept an unlimited amount of refugees? This government and Congress is truly insane if this passes. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 19:09, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • But how many Kob people are there? 10,000? We can do that, especially with UN/IWO help. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:53, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
      • But there is no plan, no numbers listed above. This government has not even proposed its tax numbers so how it can hope to pay for anything is beyond me. Further for all the talk of progress this government has done little to nothing with the time it has had thus far and I can see them doing even less with the many months ahead. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 22:59, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • What is insane is the utter selfishness of Mr. Hoffmann and the philosophy he represents, preferring to see innocent people die than let a penny of government money be spent to prevent it. I recognise the concept may be alien to members of CNP, but this government has a moral responsibility to act. We have to power to provide succour to the oppressed, that is this government's mandate, and that is what we shall do. If the CNP prefers to lend its support to those that at this moment are gleefully bayoneting babies, let them do so. I fear those Lovians who too suffered at the hands of the Burenians last year will be unimpressed, however. --Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 19:57, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
      • Anna may not even take a moment to consider Lovia but she should be aware that I am not part of the CNP, this would be abundantly clear if she spent but the smallest amount of time reading the papers or watching the news. Action should be taken but to give no plan, no numbers, no nothing is beyond stupid. You talk of government money, but you have none, your government hasn't even proposed let alone passed your taxation rates. You say you have the mandate to provide succour to the oppressed, what about those in Lovia? you've had a month in government and nothing has left your lips concerning the homeless, the jobless nor those who are ill or unwell. This act is nothing more than an impotent government throwing its weight around to try and feel powerful while Lovia slips further into the mire. It would seem that Anna reveals that she cares more about a crisis abroad, proposing a solution however poor it is within days, but cares not one bit about the Lovian, who have suffered for months, not one solution at all from her. She is a hypocrite and a traitor to the people who elected her and to every other Lovian that relies, unfortunately, on this champagne socialist government. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 22:59, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
        • You offend me deeply. This is a humanitarian emergency. A response to a genocide cannot be delayed for petty financial matters to be resolved. Those can be done later. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:13, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
          • You may have skipped a large amount of the issue that I raised but there is no plan here. There is nothing, there isn't even a proposal on how to get the refugees from A to B. You are all patting yourselves on the back because you are unable to realise that without a plan you cannot do anything. Like this government has failed to do anything, you have no plan so you fail. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 23:28, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
            • I view this as a proposal to allow the executive branch to take the actions it sees fit. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:29, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
        • Mr. Hoffmann should at the very least respect the authority of this Chamber, if not his own dignity, before befouling it with his feculent orations. His sudden concern for the Lovians whose visages his government ground languidly beneath its foot is inexplicable; rest assured that we will shortly begin action to reverse its depredations. In response to his talk of betrayal, I need give no explanation why I continue to refer to him as a member of CNP. --Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 09:57, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
          • Anna seems to confuse herself, for years I have campaigned for the worst off in society while she screeched about parties that have bettered Lovia a hundred fold compared to your petulant antics. And you give no explanation because there is none, you are simply out of touch and full of yourself. This government will achieve nothing and will end come the elections and hopefully end your career for good. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 10:32, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
    • Accept refugees? Yes. Accept all 30.000 Kòb people? For a small nation like Lovia, that's not even possible. We should somehow divide the refugees between various nations, and ideally make the Burenian government stop immediately. --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:47, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
      • My esteemed colleague makes the point. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 06:44, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
        • I think the number of Kòbtáale has already sufficiently decreased to a number we can hold though following the atomic attacks on the ^látoskì :o --OuWTB 07:03, May 20, 2015 (UTC) damn keyboard stil not installed :'(
          • Then we still need a number and a plan, even 10,000 is a great amount, that's bigger than most settlements in Lovia bar the largest towns and cities. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 07:08, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
            • We should make a Kòb village in Clymene then :o --OuWTB 07:17, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
              • Surely one of the Governors who voted in favour should take the refugees into their State? :o Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 07:51, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                • No, one of the Governors (or all of them) who does not want them in should have them in their state, so they learn the beauty of living together with another culture and what it means to support each other :o --OuWTB 08:13, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                  • Maybe they should go to Oceana to teach the Oceana to stop being separatists and love their fellows. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 08:17, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                    • Maybe we should give them a łátoskì on the City Archipelago :o --OuWTB 08:33, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                      • That's not a bad idea, recolonise the Archipelago, they're will be plenty of colonists for the matter. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 08:57, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                        • :o --OuWTB 09:04, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                          • After refugees have been accepted, we can consider further action, including distribution to other friendly nations. I will also contact the UN to request their assistance in establishing a refugee camp. The priority is to remove those whose lives are at risk as soon as possible. --Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 09:57, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
                            • You still have no plan for how to get them to said camp. Your ignorance is painful. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 10:32, May 20, 2015 (UTC)

Abstention

  • Abstention Abstention I'm gonna have to go neutral here. We have our own issues to deal with, as has been pointed out, and an unlimited number of refugees could cause a strain on our resources. That said, we should not turn our backs on refugees. It is too much for Lovia alone to have to take in all these refugees, and it makes more sence to have multiple nations, perhaps even an IWO-wide plan to divide refugees among several nations such as Prasia, Brunant, Insel, Juliana etc. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 19:38, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
    • I welcome the support for action on this issue, but would urge UL to support the proposal. This is an extremely urgent situation and we need to evacuate refugees as soon as possible. I strongly agree that we should coordinate with the IWO and hope Mr. Abrahams, with his extensive links abroad, can assist with this. --Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 20:08, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
      • Mr. Abrahams has little to no links abroad, sadly (common misconception though). You'd have to talk to the relevant persons abroad. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 21:55, May 19, 2015 (UTC)
  • ...

5 more votes required. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:54, May 24, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

I propose immediate military intervention to halt the genocide. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:29, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

We do not have an army, however. Many members of this government also adhere to a pacifist philosophy. --Anna Maria Whithdonck-Malsky 19:58, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Military intervention would require assembling a Multinational Task Force as was done the first time around. And of course if we were to get an army, it'd be some time just to pass the necessary legislation, and a while more to put it into operation. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 20:03, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

008. Lovia Recycles Act

  1. Recycling in Lovia is mandated by the Federal Government, and both implemented and managed by Lovia's states.
  2. Lovia will employ a common collection system for different types of recycling via a number of bins. These include:
    1. a green bin, for food waste going for composting
    2. a red bin, for plastics, glass and metal
    3. a blue bin, for paper and cardboard
    4. States may add other bins for further recycling including batteries, electronics, hazardous materials and other items not recyclable within the current three bins.
  3. The collection of recyclable materials for the red, green, blue and other potential bins shall be done as for garbage collection.
    1. States are free to determine dates for collection, as well as the frequency, so long as it is done no less than twice per month.
  4. All states will also set up and operate at least one designated collection point for recycling or disposing of items not recyclable via home collection, operating alongside curbside collection.
    1. These collection points may be used to dispose or recycle batteries, electrical and electronic items, hazardous items, construction material, raw materials and large or uncommon items which cannot be properly collected at the curbside.

Please do vote (pro). HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 14:38, May 20, 2015 (UTC)

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 11 votes. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 14:44, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 15 votes --OuWTB 14:51, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. The Minister of Environment is pleased with this effort. :) 77topaz (talk) 20:13, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 6 votes, though I'm not certain it's a priority. --Semyon 20:26, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 10 votes, agree with Semyon. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:38, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 20:52, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 1 Vote Miroslav Znalic 22:13, May 20, 2015 (UTC) (I don't see how it isn't a priority to some extent)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes --Bart K (talk) 11:03, May 22, 2015 (UTC)

Contra

  • Contra Contra 10 votes. Did you not revise this at all?? Among other things, who decides how many "collections points" a state has, and how many are used to dispose/recycle batteries (and how is this done), etc? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:12, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
  • It has been revised and edited (by Semyon as well). The state is free to determine the number, usage and operation of collection points, as long as it is within reason. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 15:20, May 20, 2015 (UTC)

Abstention

  • ...

Accepted This proposal is accepted! with at least 56% of all possible votes. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 20:54, May 20, 2015 (UTC)

012. Tax Rates

Income Tax:

  • Tax Exclusion of L$30,000
  • First Rate of 20% (30,000 to 60,000)
  • Second Rate of 30% (60,000 to 150,000)
  • Third Rate of 40% (150,000 to 400,000)
  • Fourth Rate of 50% (400,000 to 1,000,000)
  • Fifth Rate of 60% (1,000,000 plus)

Property Tax:

  • Tax Exclusion of 60 square meters for property
  • Property Rate of 50 cents a square meter
  • Tax Exclusion of 40,000 square meters for land
  • Land Rate of 5 cents a square meter
  • Protected Rate of 1 cent a meter ((what is this?))

Imported Sales Tax:

  • 10% IST Rate

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

Contra

  • Contra Contra 7 votes, I prefer fairer lower rates that do not attack the rich, especially no tax rates above 50%. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:25, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • ...

Abstain

Comments

Declined This proposal is declined. - moot with the passing of Hoffmann's proposal. --Semyon 13:33, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

013. Alternate Tax Rates

Income Tax:

Tax Exclusion of L$21,000
First Rate of 20% (21,000 to 52,000)
Second Rate of 30% (52,000 to 144,000)
Third Rate of 40% (144,000 to 626,000)
Fourth Rate of 50% (626,000 plus)

Property Tax:

Tax Exclusion of 60 Square Metres for Property
Property Rate of 50 Cents a Metre
Tax Exclusion of 40,000 Square Metres for Land
Land Rate of 5 Cents a Metre
Protected Rate of 1 Cent a Metre

Imported Sales Tax:

10% IST Rate

It'd raise L$2,643,796,000 Which should be more than enough for the various projects the States and Nation need to enact. It would not certainly be punitive to the richest but would ask them to lend the country a helping hand in this time of need (86% of Income Tax would come from those with over L$100,000 in earnings). The Property taxes allow small farmers and homeowners to be free of tax while requiring large property owning corporations and business people to contribute. The Imported Sales Tax would help keep Lovian industry protected during this fragile time.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

Contra

  • Contra Contra 10 votes - Too much tax on poor and not enough on rich. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:27, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
The only reason you want tax on the rich is because you hate them with a passion. This tax proposal raises 86% of funds from those with over L$100,000 income and nothing from the poorest 50%. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:45, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
They're hardly any different... —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:46, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
Again, the only reason they are hardly any different is because you have copied my proposal and hiked up taxes on the rich. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:52, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 2 votes. 20 is very high and you can start with 10%, Kunarian. Traspes - Dianna Bartol LOGO POSITIVE BLOCK 01:32, May 28, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

  • ...

Comments

An alternate to Time's proposal which is anti-anyone who earns a large amount of money. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:24, May 24, 2015 (UTC)

They're so close though... —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:29, May 24, 2015 (UTC)

The only reason they are close is because yours is essentially a copy of my proposal in the First Chamber with taxes hiked up on the rich. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:41, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
Irrelevant. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:43, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
Not irrelevant, you don't even under stand the taxes you are raising, as made clear by the non-understanding of the Protected Rate on land tax. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:44, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
Not understanding property tax is irrelevant to understanding income tax. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:46, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
If you want to go back to income tax, and talk about how you think having punitive taxes on the rich will help Lovia then feel free. For now I'm not replying so that other people can actually get in edgewise on this. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 14:54, May 24, 2015 (UTC)
I may have to vote pro on this, though I really would have liked for the lowest tax bracket only paying 10%. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 12:45, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
The lowest tax bracket is 0% though. --Semyon 14:24, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
I was talking about the lowest tax-paying bracket. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 14:29, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
I'm all for lower taxes, especially on the lower rates. Just so you know, we'd lose about 124,000,000 in funds. If you could get the people who voted pro here to support lowering the first rate to 10% then we could certainly do it. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 17:05, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
I raised the start of the first tax bracket for 21k to 30k, but apparently because adding an extra 10% tax above a million is punitive to the rich, no one's voting pro. Unamused —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 17:23, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
No you raised taxes a lot more than that. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 18:09, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
Except I didn't? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:02, May 26, 2015 (UTC)

Is the property tax per month or per year? --OuWTB 08:09, May 28, 2015 (UTC)

They're all per year (except IST), I think. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:02, May 28, 2015 (UTC)

Accepted This proposal is accepted! --Semyon 13:31, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

014. Vouchers Repeal

This repeals vouchers, adds a Qualified Teacher Status, and makes some other minor changes. For CCPL voters, the religious education provision in the Secondary Education Act has been restored. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:43, May 28, 2015 (UTC)

Primary Education Act

    1. Primary education is the educating of children in a school or privately, by qualified teachers, in order to provide them with the apt knowledge and skills to go to secondary education.
    2. Primary education is provided in primary or elementary schools, unless the child is taught privately.
      1. Primary schools can be operated privately, that is by an individual or an organization, or publicly, that is by a neighborhood, hamlet, town, city, state or by the federal state.
      2. Primary schools have to appoint teachers that are qualified to teach the subjects they are asked to teach.
        1. All primary school teachers must have obtained a single Lovian Certificate of Education Level 2 or above.
        2. All primary school teachers must pass a set of examinations, consisting of an oral and written component, created and managed by the Ministry of Education.
        3. All primary school teachers must have obtained Qualified Teacher Status, which can be gained through completing an approved teacher training course, created and managed by the Ministry of Education.
      3. Primary schools can turn down pupils only in special cases, these being the inability to provide education to a pupil with a particular problem, the inability to properly provide education for a pupil due to a lack of resources or if a pupil has proven to be unable to behave according to previous schools' regulations. In no other cases, pupils shall be denied access without consultation with the Ministry of Education.
    3. Primary schools provide general and basic education to a child. All subjects taught must be Lovian Certificates of Education and may not be Supplementary Lovian Certificate of Education.
      1. These subjects should be taught at least three hours per week, during the six years of primary education:
        • English (level 1)
        • Mathematics (level 1)
        • Arts and Crafts (level 1)
      2. These subjects should be taught at least two hours per week, during the six years of primary education:
        • Physical Education (level 1)
        • Social Education (level 1)
        • The school must also choose a level 1 language subject to provide other than English that must be taught at least two hours a week, from a list which the State Government will provide.
      3. These subjects should be taught at least one hour per week, during the six years of primary education:
        • History (level 1)
        • Geography (level 1)
        • Science (level 1)
        • Computing (level 1)
      4. Primary schools may also provide more languages than the two mandatory subjects to pupils. The specific additional languages a pupil is taught however will be selected by the pupil themselves from the list of additional languages the school provides beyond the two mandatory language subjects.
      5. Primary schools are free to choose to provide more classes of any of these subjects, or to provide other level 1 subjects considered valuable, in order to provide a minimum of twenty-two hours of class, every week of the schoolyear. Primary schools may provide more classes beyond the twenty-two hour minimum but none beyond the maximum of thirty hours of class, every week of the schoolyear.
      6. There shall be no doctrinal classes in primary schools.
        1. In a course called 'Religions of the world', children may be taught about religions. If the school wishes to teach this subject, all major religions should be brought to attention, as well as a non-religious attitude.
        2. Primary schools and their teachers may not try to convince children of a certain religious or political point of view, nor can they make any pupil exercise a religious act, unless the pupil and/or the parents agree with taking doctrinal classes.
    4. These rules apply for the arrangement of the timetable:
      1. A break of at least 10 minutes is compulsory between every two hours; more often is allowed.
      2. There shall be no classes on Sunday.
      3. There shall be no classes between 7 PM and 7 AM.
      4. There must be a lunch break every day, of at least an hour, between noon and 2 PM.
    5. Private education, by a qualified teacher, can be provided. In this case, the same rules apply.
      1. Private primary schools must follow all non-financial regulations provided in this law. They may not charge more than $11,000 for tuition.
    6. Every child residing in Lovia has to receive six years of primary education, beginning in the schoolyear during which the child will reach the age of 6 years.
      1. Only if a qualified psychologist and the pupil's teacher find it appropriate for the pupil to skip a schoolyear and continue education with older pupils, and if the parents agree on this, the pupil may skip a schoolyear.
      2. Every pupil has to receive primary education until the schoolyear during which the pupil will reach the age of 11, except in the case mentioned above.
    7. In case a primary school does not provide the kind of education described in this article, the Minister of Education or the Royal Educational Aims Council can decide to shut down the school until the service provided does qualify. In the meantime, the Ministry of Education must provide education to the pupils of that school, by allowing them instant pro-tempore access to another school.
      1. The Royal Educational Aims Council is a council under the Ministry of Education, consisting of three educational specialists who decide on the secondary education curriculum, and who can close a school (of any level) if it does not qualify with the requirements.
        1. The following three persons are members of the council: the Minister of Education, the Prime Minister, and the Minister of Labour as the pupils' and students' welfare watchdog.
        2. The Rector of Blackburn University is added to the council as its fourth member only when the council is looking into a matter directly concerned with the higher educational system.
    8. The Ministry of Education or States are allowed to create legislation concerning special needs education, and education in another language (special education).
      1. The same rules apply to special education as to regular institutions.
      2. Regular education must always remain available to pupils.
        1. All settlements with more than 5,000 inhabitants must have at least one regular primary school.
        2. A state must always have at least one regular primary school.
    9. All public primary schools within Lovia are publicly funded by the Ministry of Education.
      1. No child or their family may pay to use the services of a public primary school.
      2. Currently, a primary school will receive $11,000 for every student regularly attending the primary school.
      3. If a primary school believes it requires more funding, it may apply for it to the Ministry of Education.
        1. If the school disagrees with the ministry's decision, it may appeal it to a court.
      4. A primary school must be approved by qualified reviewers from the Ministry of Education every three years in order to receive funding.
      5. If an organization other than the Ministry of Education seeks to create schools that aim to receive public funding, they must be approved by the Ministry.
    10. Primary schools must register certain details in a primary school register.
      1. A primary school must register:
        • Their name.
        • The address of the school.
        • The number of pupils they are currently teaching a primary education to.
        • The number of teachers they are currently employing to teach primary education.
        • The date of registration.
      2. These registers are managed on a state by state basis by the relevant state government.
        1. Further details may be requested by the state government.
      3. The details must be renewed every half-year since the date of registration.
        1. If they are not renewed then the school shall be given a weeks grace period to fill in the details along with a notification from the state government, if it fails to renew details after the grace period then it is no longer considered able to provide education to students and must be shut down until it renews the details. In the meanwhile the Ministry of Education must provide education to the students of that school.
      4. Only primary schools that are registered in the primary school register may be considered primary schools by law.

Secondary Education Act

    1. Secondary education is the educating of adolescents in a school or privately, by qualified teachers, in order to provide them with the apt knowledge and skills to lead a life in a modern society and in order to be able to continue studying in university or take on an apprenticeship.
      1. After having completed the schoolyear of their 16th birthday a child may choose to not continue ordinary school and instead pursue an apprenticeship, should they secure an apprenticeship then they may continue their education under their employer as an apprentice, if they at any point lose their apprenticeship they must at the soonest possible date rejoin a school.
    2. Secondary education is provided in high schools or secondary schools, unless the adolescent is taught privately.
      1. Secondary schools can be operated privately, that is by an individual or an organization, or publicly, that is by a neighborhood, hamlet, town, city, state or by the federal state.
      2. Secondary schools have to appoint teachers that are qualified to teach the subjects they are asked to teach.
        1. All secondary school teachers must have obtained a single Lovian Certificate of Education Level 4 or above or a Supplementary Lovian Certificate of Education Level 4 or above.
        2. All secondary school teachers must pass a set of examinations in their specialty, consisting of an oral and written component, created and managed by the Ministry of Education.
        3. All secondary school teachers must have obtained Qualified Teacher Status, which can be gained through completing an approved teacher training course, created and managed by the Ministry of Education.
      3. Secondary schools can turn down pupils only in special cases, these being the inability to provide education to a pupil with a particular problem, the inability to properly provide education for a pupil due to a lack of resources or if a pupil has proven to be unable to behave according to previous schools' regulations. In no other cases, pupils shall be denied access without consultation with the Ministry of Education.
    3. Secondary schools provide two tiers of education, one to a child from the year in which they turn 12 until the year in which they turn 16, and another to a child from the year in which they turn 17 until the year in which they turn 18.
      1. Secondary schools provide a general education to a child up until the age of 16. All subjects taught must be Lovian Certificates of Education and may not be Supplementary Lovian Certificate of Education.
        1. These subjects should be taught at least four hours per week, during the first four years of secondary education:
          • Mathematics (level 2)
        2. These subjects should be taught at least two hours per week, during the first four years of secondary education:
          • English (level 2)
          • Literature (level 2)
          • Art (level 2)
          • Physical Education (level 2)
          • Social Education (level 2)
          • Technology (level 2)
          • Science (level 2)
          • The school must also choose a level 2 language subject to provide other than English that must be taught at least two hours a week, from a list which the State Government will provide.
        3. These subjects should be taught at least one hour per week, during the first four years of secondary education:
          • History (level 2)
          • Geography (level 2)
          • Computing (level 2)
        4. Secondary schools may also provide more languages than the two mandatory subjects to pupils between the ages of 12 and 16. The specific additional languages a pupil is taught however will be selected by the pupil themselves from the list of additional languages the school provides beyond the two mandatory language subjects.
        5. Secondary schools are free to choose to provide more classes of any of these subjects, or to provide other level 2 subjects considered valuable, in order to provide a minimum of thirty hours of class, every week of the schoolyear. Secondary schools may provide more classes beyond the thirty hour minimum but none beyond the maximum of forty hours of class, every week of the schoolyear.
      2. Secondary schools provide an advanced education to a child of the age of 17 and 18. All subjects taught must be Lovian Certificates of Education and may not be Supplementary Lovian Certificate of Education.
        1. These subjects should be taught at least five hours per week, during the last two years of secondary education:
          • English (level 3)
          • Mathematics (level 3)
          • The school must also choose a level 3 language subject to provide other than English that must be taught at least five hours a week, from a list which the State Government will provide.
        2. Secondary schools must provide a wide selection of level 3 subjects for pupils to choose from to study. Pupils may choose to study a minimum of three extra subjects to study to bring their total time within school to 30 hours of class, every week of the schoolyear. Pupils may choose to study two more subjects beyond the thirty hour minimum, bringing their total time within school to 40 hours of class, every week of the schoolyear.
        3. Each additional subject a pupil chooses to study must be taught for five hours each week.
      3. Doctrinal classes may be provided in secondary schools by the school itself, if wished.
        1. There shall be no more than one hour of doctrinal class per week.
        2. The content of doctrinal classes, in which the teacher teaches a particular religious or political world view, can be chosen by the school and teacher.
          1. There shall be no doctrinal classes about extremist views; that is: no far-right, far-left, extremist religious, violent or extreme nationalist views can be taught. If needed, the Royal Educational Aims Council and the Minister of Education can dismiss a doctrinal course.
        3. A student is allowed not to follow a doctrinal course provided by a secondary school, if he or she does not want to take this course. In order to skip these classes, the student has to notify the school direction and stay on school property during the courses.
        4. A student may not be forced to attend a religious school against their will.
        5. A course called 'Religions of the world', or any course similar to it, is not considered a doctrinal course.
        6. No tests and exams shall be taken for these courses.
    4. These rules apply for the arrangement of the timetable:
      1. A break of at least 10 minutes is compulsory between every two hours; more often is allowed.
      2. There shall be no classes on Sunday.
      3. There shall be no classes between 7 PM and 7 AM.
      4. There must be a lunch break every day, of at least an hour, between noon and 2 PM.
    5. Private education, by a qualified teacher, can be provided. In this case, the same rules apply.
      1. Private secondary schools must follow all non-financial regulations provided in this law. They may not charge more than $15,000 for tuition.
    6. Every child residing in Lovia has to receive at least four years of secondary education, beginning in the schoolyear after which the adolescent has finished his primary education successfully. Additionally should a child not be employed as an apprentice, they must continue to receive education until they have completed the educational year in which they are 18.
      1. Only if a qualified psychologist and the student's teacher find it appropriate for the student to skip a schoolyear and continue education with older students, and if the parents agree on this, the student may skip a schoolyear.
    7. Secondary schools that do not provide the kind of education described in this article, the Minister of Education or the Royal Educational Aims Council can decide to shut down the school until the service provided do qualify. In the meanwhile the Ministry of Education must provide education to the students of that school.
    8. The Ministry of Education and States are allowed to create legislation concerning special needs education, religious education, and education in another language (special education).
      1. The same rules apply to special education as to regular institutions.
      2. Regular education must always remain available to pupils.
        1. All settlements with more than 10,000 inhabitants must have at least one regular secondary school.
        2. A state must always have at least one regular secondary school.
    9. All public secondary schools within Lovia are publicly funded by the Ministry of Education.
      1. No child or their family may pay to use the services of a public secondary school.
      2. Currently, a secondary school will receive $15,000 for every student regularly attending the secondary school.
      3. If a secondary school believes it requires more funding, it may apply for it to the Ministry of Education.
        1. If the school disagrees with the ministry's decision, it may appeal it to a court.
      4. A secondary school must be approved by qualified reviewers from the Ministry of Education every three years in order to receive funding.
      5. If an organization other than the Ministry of Education seeks to create schools that aim to receive public funding, they must be approved by the Ministry.
    10. Secondary schools must register certain details in a secondary school register.
      1. A secondary school must register:
        • Their name.
        • The address of the school.
        • The number of pupils they are currently teaching a secondary education to.
        • The number of teachers they are currently employing to teach secondary education.
        • The date of registration.
      2. These registers are managed on a state by state basis by the relevant state government.
        1. Further details may be requested by the state government.
      3. The details must be renewed every half-year since the date of registration.
        1. If they are not renewed then the school shall be given a weeks grace period to fill in the details along with a notification from the state government, if it fails to renew details after the grace period then it is no longer considered able to provide education to students and must be shut down until it renews the details. In the meanwhile the Ministry of Education must provide education to the students of that school.
      4. Only secondary schools that are registered in the secondary school register may be considered secondary schools by law.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 10 votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:41, May 28, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 6 votes --Semyon 00:26, May 29, 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Pro Pro 15 votes --OuWTB 10:34, May 30, 2015 (UTC) I do not see a direct need for changing the voucher system, but the teacher qualification thing is a good thing.
  • Pro Pro 7 votes Frijoles333 TALK 14:59, May 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro Traspes - Dianna Bartol LOGO POSITIVE BLOCK 01:00, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Contra

  • Strong Contra Contra 7 votes Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 10:52, May 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 15 votes. --OuWTB 10:54, May 30, 2015 (UTC) Kunar's right: No child or their family may pay to use the services of a public secondary school.
  • Contra Contra 7 votes. Bart K (talk) 14:02, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 7 votes. 77topaz (talk) 01:02, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • ...

Especially with topaz's abstention, this bill will not pass. :o —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:23, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Declined This proposal is declined. Due to the failure of this bill, I will resign as Education Minister. --William Krosby 20:52, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

Need to read it first. --OuWTB 06:15, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

This section contradicts itself:

6. Every child residing in Lovia has to receive six years of primary education, beginning in the schoolyear during which the child will reach the age of 6 years. That is, they start when they're five.

  1. Only if a qualified psychologist and the pupil's teacher find it appropriate for the pupil to skip a schoolyear and continue education with older pupils, and if the parents agree on this, the pupil may skip a schoolyear.
  2. Every pupil has to receive primary education until the schoolyear during which the pupil will reach the age of 12, except in the case mentioned above. They end when they're twelve, i.e. seven years after they start and not six.

Also, you say that "there shall be no classes between 7 PM and 7 AM". Don't you think 7 PM is too late for school to end, and that 7 AM is too early for it to start? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:57, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

@contradiction: I see your point, though there is ambiguity whether the 'schoolyear during which the pupil will reach the age of 12' is part of the primary education or not. @classes: personally yes, I think the limits are designed to be liberal though. --Semyon 14:23, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

Interesting. I have changed it to be non-contradictory (I hope). —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:11, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

That's indeed better :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 18:28, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

Let's see. --OuWTB 10:28, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

So it is true, the segregation begins. This government is nothing but a sham. Under the voucher system any child may go to any school regardless of wealth and it was choice not necessity that governed the decision of which school they should go to. under the new system, rich and poor will become segregated. Those with money shall be able to afford to choose which school they go to while poor students will be forced to go to designated schools.

Those who believe that education should be based around the need and choice of the student should not support this.

I hope that Oos will change his vote and that no others will support this. CCPL particularly due to the issues this will cause for religious education in smaller and less wealthy communities. As I doubt the new state controlled school system that all poorer children will be forced to attend will allow religious education. Under the voucher system the government would have allowed them their choice but under this system if they are not wealthy enough they have no choice.

I strongly oppose this ideological and negative attack based on nothing but hatred of private institutions. If people want qualified teachers I shall make a proposal below that they can support. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 10:49, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

Not at all. Vouchers are the system that produce segregation, for reasons I am not interested in writing out again once more. Schools will include many choices to support the student, and the special education is included in this law. Competition has no place in education. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:19, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

On chat, Oos has said he wants money to go directly to pupils. This is essentially the case, where schools get funding based on how many students attend. Public schools can be managed by an organization other than the MoE, they just have to be inspected by the MoE. If a school elects to not receive government money, they can. But then students have to pay tuition. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:13, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

015. Government reshuffle

This needs to be passed. I propose the following:

  • PM: Oos Wes Ilava (filling vacancy)
  • Speaker: Neil Hardy (filling vacancy)
  • Minister of Labour: Lukas Hoffmann (filling vacancy)
  • Minister of Commerce: Charles Jones (filling vacancy)
  • Minister of Minorities: Bart Koenen (filling vacancy)
  • Minister of Transportation: Jonas Hrádske, could be replaced with another of Oos's chars (replacing Wrexley)
  • Minister of Family, Youth and Elderly: Mark Eastwood (replacing Sarah Lambert)
  • Minister of Culture: Dimitri Kalinnikov (replacing Aina Sarria)
  • Minister of Justice: Aina Sarria (moved from Culture to replace Al-Asmari)

Notes:

  • Sarria has been given Justice, which she has previously shown interest in, to compensate for the loss of Culture.
  • The new entrants have 8 out of 20 ministries, which reflects the balance in congress reasonably well. They also have the PM position.
  • Potential problem: Happy does not have a ministry (edit: if you don't count Speaker, of course). However, he explicitly stated a month ago he did not want one and did not even give himself one in his own gov proposal. He did express interest in Tourism and Sport, but Topaz is doing something with that, so I oppose firing him. I hope this proposal won't get held up for that.
  • If additional problems appear, we can hold another more minor reshuffle later.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

Contra

  • Contra Contra 3 votes (CPL.nm, Milivoy and MLPE) --Semyon 13:03, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 2 votes (CPL.nm) —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:55, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 1 vote (AMWM) --Semyon 13:03, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • Abstention Abstention 8 votes (SLP) - retroactively get rid of Minorities. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:55, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
    • I agree that Culture already covers Minorities, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a ministry to focus on the large and specific 'sub-issue' of Minorities. By that logic, we should abolish all ministries, because they all fall within the remit of Family, Youth and the Elderly. :o --Semyon 15:09, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Accepted This proposal is accepted! By a 53% majority. It has been an honor to serve as speaker. --Isabella Munson 20:30, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

I would appreciate a ministry but it seems this is going to pass without so I don't have any real say on this matter. Is there absolutely nothing available? I saw I had Labour yesterday but that's changed. Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 15:31, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

Possibly. What are your preferences? --Semyon 15:47, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
I hope you will vote Pro Pro, though, because I think that getting the new government in is a priority. I'll certainly support a small reshuffle later to get you a position. --Semyon 15:59, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
I'd appreciate Culture, Defence, Education, Foreign Affairs or Tourism and Sport. Most of the ones are from users that have more than one. Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 16:34, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

I think I'll vote pro but I hope that my vote will be in the knowledge that I hope for a reshuffle after the State Elections in which Hoffmann can acquire a Ministry more suited to him and Happy can acquire a Ministry of his own. Hoffmann LogoCNP2wt KunarianTALK 17:24, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

I saw you were quite interested in Speaker (you appointed Borja), if you'd like that role I'd be happy to exchange it for Culture. I appreciate your support. Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 17:29, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

(edc) Noted; I also support another reshuffle by the state elections at the very latest, ideally much sooner. --Semyon 17:30, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

I think it should be as soon as possible, it's already June. Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 17:33, June 1, 2015 (UTC)

016. Research Funding Act

I am proposing a slightly modified form of the text currently in the First Chamber, having taken into account all issues raised. I'd also like to note my regret at the lack of even brief comment from many MOTCs, while thanking those who did take the time. --Peter Blanch 22:45, June 6, 2015 (UTC)

Text

  1. This act provides for government funding for scientific research in Lovia. Funding will be regulated by a central body, the Lovian Research Council, which is funded by the federal government.
    1. The federal government will commit 3% of annual tax revenue to providing the Council with funds.
    2. The Council will provide records of expenditure to the Minister of Finance, who will audit them in consultation with the Minister of Science, to ensure the funding is wisely allocated.
      1. Ministers must carry out the audit in an entirely neutral way, to ensure the objectivity of all research is not threatened.
    3. If there are concerns regarding allocations of funding, Congress should vote on whether a recipient should lose funding.
      1. Prior to voting, independent advisors should be summoned to Congress to provide expert opinions to MOTCs on the issue.
  2. The Council is composed of between 5 and 20 members.
    1. The Council is headed by a chief executive officer (CEO) appointed by the Minister of Science.
      1. The CEO should be a globally respected researcher in their field, with multiple publications in leading journals.
    2. A Chief Financial Officer (CFO) is also appointed by the Minister of Science.
    3. Between 5 and 20 other members should be appointed by the Minister and the CEO, in consultation with other council members. At least one member should be appointed with expertise in each of the following areas:
      1. biology, biochemistry and biotechnology
      2. engineering, physical sciences and mathematics
      3. medical research
      4. social sciences, arts and humanities
      5. environmental sciences
  3. Both government-owned and privately-owned organizations may apply to the Council for funding.
    1. Applications should be sent to the CEO by the 31st of December of each year, in order to receive funding at the start of the financial year in April.
      1. Applications should specify the amount of funding required, the qualifications, experience and achievements of the applicants, and several supporting references.
    2. Funding to privately-owned organizations will be in the form of a purchase of a share in the organization and its profits. The share will be considered to be owned by the government, but administered by the Council.
    3. The following criteria should be considered before deciding to provide a grant:
      1. The quality of the research carried out in the past by the organization, in particular if previously funded by the Council
      2. The extent to which the research is unique, i.e. will provide significant new results compared to any other research funded by the Council or ongoing elsewhere in the world.
      3. The ethical implications of the research.
      4. The likelihood that the research will:
        1. improve the lives of Lovian citizens and humanity in general.
        2. provide a boost to the Lovian economy.
        3. generate revenue for federal or state governments.
        4. Research that is scientifically interesting, but does not meet some or all above criteria, may still be worthy of funding, in particular if it has failed to obtain non-Council funding for that reason.
      5. The amount of funding already obtained by the organization.
    4. Funding applications should be assessed by the Council members with the greatest relevant expertise, and the CFO. They will then recommend to the Council if the application should be accepted, and if so, how much funding the project should receive.
    5. The CFO will draw up a budget based on the recommendations of the Council members during the first three months of the year. The budget should be approved by the Council by majority voting; if not, it should be modified and reproposed. The budget should go into effect on April 1st.
    6. Research in all areas described in 2.3. should be funded. The Council should ensure breadth in the type of projects funded.
  4. The council should devote part of its budget to funding 30 Council Scholarships for Lovian students to undertake Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degrees.
    1. Each scholarship provides funding for three years, for both research costs and a living stipend.
    2. The Ph.D. will be accredited by Blackburn University. Students will be supervised by one or more senior researchers funded by the Council
    3. Organizations may also offer their own Ph.D. scholarships, using either their own or Council funding. In the latter case, this must be agreed with the Council.
  5. The Council also has the following responsibilities:
    1. Providing advice to researchers.
    2. Organizing a conference every three months where researchers can present and discuss their research, and share their expertise with one another.
    3. Monitoring the spending of allocated grants.
    4. Arranging for researchers to share facilities, if appropriate.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

Contra

  • Contra Contra 15 votes --OuWTB 16:57, June 10, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

Comments

Accepted This proposal is accepted! By a 64% majority - Flag of Lovia Neil Hardy 15:12, June 12, 2015 (UTC)

Why you guys support this diabolic law? :'( --OuWTB 08:08, June 12, 2015 (UTC)

Why do you oppose it? Why don't you support it so research to complaining stones can be appropriately funded? :'( --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 14:48, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
Because the Bible says that science is bad :'( --OuWTB 14:53, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
1. If so, why did early/mediaeval Christians practice maths and astronomy? Why not have Easter etc. on the same date every year so they didn't need it? 2. Quote the passage that says science is bad :P 3. Are all sciences bad according to you? :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 16:20, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
The Bible seems fairly positive about 'knowledge' and 'wisdom', which are the closest concepts they had in ancient times to modern science. :o --Semyon 19:21, June 12, 2015 (UTC)
You guys patronizing the Bible? :'( --OuWTB 09:40, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
You patronizing the Bible by saying untrue things about it? :'( --Semyon 10:23, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
I think you just sadified God though :'( --OuWTB 10:26, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
Qrÿf likes his people to know the truth though, therefore science does not sadify him :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 11:16, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
Nuclear science* :o --OuWTB 11:20, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
:P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 11:57, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
Nekrif nelikit nuklejari resjersia. :'( --Semyon 15:40, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
Neqrÿf neságo netakavíhki. --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 18:17, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
Nedumum ke neklihef nenilhuk ke Nekrif nese netakaviki. :o --Semyon 19:03, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
Nú neklýxem: nenovlétra'úrdubörjùnast neságo nekompléta :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 20:04, June 13, 2015 (UTC) Yes, "not-new-letter-word-beginning" is a rather takavíhki way of saying "alliteration". Normally it'd be "àlliteràtsia" :P
This is a takaviki conversation for the Lovian Congress. :P --Semyon 20:13, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
It seems to be have been invaded by the Burenian one. :o 77topaz (talk) 21:34, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
The Burenian government thinks this strategy works better than last year's :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 09:16, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

017. Eternal Leader Oos Wes Ilava

Proposal:

  • Abolish Constitution, Federal Law, State Laws and any other law.
  • Give all power to Oos Wes Ilava, thus making his position as Eternal Leader de jure as well as de facto.
  • Create a new constitution with the following text: 'All power and authority in the Kingdom of Lovia inheres to Eternal Leader Oos Wes Ilava.'

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 1 vote. --Marc Thomassen 12:19, June 14, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 14 votes. --OuWTB 12:47, June 14, 2015 (UTC) :o (CCPL - RTP - OSB)

Contra

  • Contra Contra 4 votes. --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 12:37, June 14, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 1 vote. --OuWTB 12:48, June 14, 2015 (UTC) (LF)
  • Contra Contra 7 votes, for some reason, part of this doesn't quite make me feel comfortable... KunarianTALK 12:52, June 14, 2015 (UTC)
    You attractive :o --OuWTB 13:01, June 14, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 11 votes. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 13:46, June 14, 2015 (UTC)
  • Contra Contra 7 votes. :P 77topaz (talk) 03:49, June 15, 2015 (UTC)

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 10 votes, cuz he ain't socialist enough. :'( —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:56, June 14, 2015 (UTC)
    Cuz a socialist never gets things done like 'cle Oos do :o --OuWTB 13:01, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

018. IWO Membership for Juliana

This is a vote on whether Juliana (link) should be allowed to join the IWO.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 10 votes. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 03:02, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 5 votes. Traspes - Dianna Bartol LOGO POSITIVE BLOCK
  • Pro Pro 15 votes. --OuWTB 08:23, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. 77topaz (talk) 08:35, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. I don't know why we didn't do this earlier to be honest, the current system of admitting new IWO members is inefficient and takaviki... we need IWO reform --Frijoles333 TALK 09:29, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. Bart K (talk) 12:51, June 25, 2015 (UTC) Under the condition that the image on the main page is updated to reflect the current situation that the nation is no longer located on actual existing land.
  • Pro Pro 4 votes. --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:04, June 25, 2015 (UTC) I agree with Frijoles and Bart.

Contra

  • ...

Abstain

  • ...

Accepted This proposal is accepted! By a 55% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:35, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

019. High-speed track from Connection Bridge to Newhaven

This vote is all about the creation of a new high-speed railroad track from the Connection Bridge to Newhaven to cut travel time between NC en Newhaven and make our railroad system efficient. This 37 km track will cost us L$3.340.000.000, which we can easily pay for by 25% National Government, 25% railway companies, 25% private investments, and 25% Kings and Sylvania state governments and environmental organizations. This means we get to spend about $L830.000.000 ourselves.

Voting

Congress Voting Options
  • {{pro}} resulting in: Pro Pro
  • {{contra}} gives: Contra Contra
  • {{abstention}} gives: Abstention Abstention

Pro

  • Pro Pro 15 votes. --OuWTB 08:23, June 25, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 4 votes. --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 14:34, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes. Bart K (talk) 17:25, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 10 votes, but we should go back to the old system of making money come out of thin air, since we don't have an established economy yet and it would make sense for things to be retroactive, etc. So in this case I'm just going to pretend all the cost figures mean nothing and instead we just create the high-speed track without worrying about cost. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 17:59, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
No because then people like you can promise the world and not worry about the realities of delivering it. KunarianTALK 18:12, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
Yes because we are not reality and we really have minimal framework to do this cost cuz we still haven't even agreed on the scale of our nation, as shown by Oos below. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:23, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 7 votes - Under the understanding that the first wave of spending will be the federal government, the second wave will be the state governments, the third will be the railway companies and the last will be the investors. This way the federal government which already has incomes sorted can get things started, the state governments of Sylvania and Kings can sort out their incomes. Once half the work is done railway companies will have no problem putting their money where their mouth is and private investors will follow shortly. KunarianTALK 18:12, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • Pro Pro 6 votes. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 14:47, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

Contra

  • ...

Abstain

  • Abstention Abstention 5 votes. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 14:47, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
    • Abstention Abstention 7 votes. I'm abstaining until we solve these financial questions. I'm also abstaining cause I find it rather takaviki for a country the size of Cyprus to have a high speed railway-- Frijoles333 TALK 17:45, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
      In my defence: we either have high-speed rails or none, as the distances between our big settlements are enormous. Not having this track high-speed means that a journey from NC to Newhaven takes several hours. Something which discourages train use and makes everyone go my car or plane causing not only huge environmental impact, but also a definitive loss in our public transportation system. --OuWTB 18:40, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
      I don't buy into that logic of all or none; our current train system does just fine and distances between our cities are not that huge. And look at the United States; they are much larger, much more populous and they don't have high-speed rail. Granted that's the tire companies at work but we can work out fine with standard trains. What puts me off is the cost though. I'm not a railroad connaisseur, but the costs are astronomically high for a small country like Lovia, especially for just 37 kilometers. Do we even have the money? Would we need to cut funding to other more pressing matters? I'm starting to reconsider my pro votes actually. We could actually fund a fighter jet program with this type of money. Do we have a breakdown as to where the money is going to and how we got to 3.3 billion? Using that figure and the 37 km of length, it roughly comes out to 90.27 million dollars per kilometer or 90270.27 dollars for a single meter. The price of a brand new Range Rover HSE (in the US) for just a single meter of railway doesn't seem right. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 18:57, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
Oos, I agree with your reasoning about how a high speed track can help the environment, but I'm still not sure the costs or distances involved justify building the railway. Like Horton said, I would rather such a large sum of money went to more urgent matters. And with the distances involved, a normal speed rail service is more than adequate. Perhaps we should instead focus on upgrading and repairing existing transport links before considering projects such as this :o Frijoles333 TALK 19:06, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
@Frijoles: The alternatives would be: either close off the railway from TV to Hurket-on-Kings as it cannot be more profitable than even a bus system.. or create a non-high speed track from Connection Bridge to Newhaven. That'd cost us about L$500.000.000 :o --OuWTB 19:09, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
@Horton: true, high-speed rails require way more precision than a normal railway :o --OuWTB 19:11, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
50 million is much much more reasonable. We're not like Europe with an interconnected network of trains (where it makes sense for high speed) or Japan (with a large population regularly using trains and an obsessive compulsion for being on time) who desperately needs them. A standard rail line seems perfectly fine and the costs something we can bear. HORTON11: Inbox • Follow me! 19:14, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
I have to stress that a normal railway is still taking a lot of time, but we could decide to upgrade it step by step or partially make it highspeed. --OuWTB 19:16, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what to say here :o I just fish we would stop caring about money so much since we never have done so before. We should only start once we know for sure (not Kunarian's decree) how our economy is and what the scale of the nation is. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:23, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • Abstention Abstention 7 votes. I agree with Horton and Frijoles's points. 77topaz (talk) 22:37, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
  • Abstention Abstention 5 votes. This is an expensive waste of the taxpayers money. People need some more things that are more urgent. Traspes - Dianna Bartol LOGO POSITIVE BLOCK 23:17, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

Comments

We do reach an important point here where money from thin air is battling construction time. Now we choose to no longer take money from thin air for realisticness purposes, we reach the problem of construction time. Usually, it takes several years to construct a railway like this. Are we going to follow our newly-set course of realisticness and wait a few years before actually implemented this railway in our system? Bart K (talk) 11:29, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

we've done this before with the expansion of the railway lines in Oceana and Sylvania. It took a few years to complete them and this will be no different. I certainly think that dates of completion should be added to this proposal. KunarianTALK 12:36, July 1, 2015 (UTC)
Have to say that the railway to Charleston was never updated and as a consequence it does not exist :o --OuWTB 17:21, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

@TM: the scale of our nation has already been agreed upon. --OuWTB 12:44, July 2, 2015 (UTC)

I recall something to that effect, but I think under that scale it wouldn't talk "several hours" to go from NC to NH, so there is still disagreement obviously. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:36, July 2, 2015 (UTC)

Only from you time. I very clearly know the size of Lovia and I again don't think we should be retroactively changing things to suit your desires. KunarianTALK 16:51, July 2, 2015 (UTC)
I think you're a bitch :o (serious: with less than 10,000 km^2 area it makes no sense for it to take "several hours" to go from NC to NH (seems like it should be more like two), so again, there is still disagreement obviously). —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:04, July 2, 2015 (UTC)
I'm also not disputing the total area, it just seems that people don't understand well how long/wide each island is. @"Only from you time": you fucking bitch. Even if it was only from me, that is only people no one else is bothering to discuss this. @I very clearly know: Bitch. Do you? You may understand the total area but you clearly don't know the time it takes to travel to places. @retroactively changing things: Not really proposing that, except for updating things from the 20,000 population era and before when we settled the total area of the island. Also, nothing wrong with retroactivity, you bitch. @suit your desires: you fucking bitch! Ugh! You're being so fucking rude and unnecessarily hostile and it's working at angering me! —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:10, July 2, 2015 (UTC)
Time is angry, HIS ARGUMENT IS INSTANTLY INVALIDATED! But more seriously. One of the reasons I argued against you on school funding was because of distance issues. Also retro-activity is not needed to change things 99% of the time but rather to add in missing details. When you talk about retroactively changing things that are already established, 99% of the time I would say you shouldn't. KunarianTALK 21:31, July 2, 2015 (UTC)

Under that scale we get to User:Ooswesthoesbes/Train: it's 2 hours and 26-16=2 hours and 10 minutes :o That's several hours, I'd say :P --OuWTB 14:07, July 2, 2015 (UTC)

I'd say that's a couple of hours :o --Frijoles333 TALK 15:03, July 2, 2015 (UTC)
You patronizing me? :'( --OuWTB 15:09, July 2, 2015 (UTC)

@tm/kun: 1. you both bitchy :3 2. Why everything so escalative? :'( Why TM so unnecessarily hostile like with Bart? :'( 3. I agree with Kun. Size was determined and if we change it again we got to update stuff like Bus Service Oceana, which I, of course, am not going to do and will make me more angry than you guys've ever seen :o 4. I agree with TM on the money from thin-air bit :o 5. I agree with the middle-line that we should allow some retroactivity when it comes to undescribed shit and irrealistic things. --OuWTB 08:27, July 3, 2015 (UTC)

Why Kun so unnecessarily hostile like with Bart? I'm not saying we change the size. I'm saying we define things that were misdefined, because they were from the 20,000 population era or other reasons. I don't want to change anything that's been properly set up after we set our population and area. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:14, July 3, 2015 (UTC)
:o To be fucking honest, I just think you guys wanna have summing to fight over :3 --OuWTB 07:11, July 4, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.
Advertisement