PMRC/Atlasian Post Poll: Public Fuel and Power Act

[Simfan34]

This poll will run for 5 days.

[SWE]

Yes

[TNF]

Yes (sane)

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

No (sane)

[Simfan34]

Unusually, JCL is in the right here:

No (sane)

[Maxwell]

Hell no.

[Goldwater]

Hell no.

[Oakvale]

The fact that it has unanimous support among Labor Senators is literally inexplicable to me. There's been no apparent attempt to think about the actual consequences that unilaterally seizing a tenth of the economy would have on the "workers" they're purportedly trying to protect through this expression of ancient Marxist dogma.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It's a troubling Bill that risks numerous ongoing consequences.

As I said, I'm not opposed to nationalisation - I am opposed to this Bill that takes no stock in how (with capped prices) the Boards will be able to manage increased wage demands, fund R&D, maintain and expand existing infrastructure. Something that profits are usually directed towards.

It's well-intentioned but is a disaster in the offing.

[DemPGH]

A strong lean yes.

It's been one of the stranger Twilight Zone debates for sure. One of the issues for me is that a lot of the people arguing against this bill don't even agree that there is a problem, so would they be motivated to fix any of the issues this bill seeks to remedy if the bill is vetoed? Certainly not. They'll wash their hands of it and then go on to something else. I'm really not about to have that. Will they agree to a redraft? They've said, "Nope."

So we don't have a lot of choices, do we?

[Simfan34]

What is the problem? What issues does the bill seek to remedy? The "problem" of private ownership, as TNF proposed it for? Some people are poor, yes, and have trouble affording fuel. But surely that problem, which was, mind you, brought up only after people had started voting for the bill, requires targeted aid and assistance, not the bludgeon of nationalisation? Why was the actual problem that needed to be addressed not brought up sooner? It is one thing for TNF to say he proposed it because he opposes private ownership. But to not give a reason to vote for it to imply that you agree with said reasoning.

The fact is that the cause here came only after the solution was proposed. Which is absolutely ludicrous.

[Simfan34]

The debate on this bill has many salient points for the debate on the bill at present.

[DemPGH]

Interesting article. Paragraphs 3-4 are most relevant. If it's set up right, the damn thing will pay for itself. I think people are kind of panicking a little.

It's not just price gouging and things like that, that's bad enough, but rather the stranglehold that the private sector and "big oil" have on policymaking.

Well, there's much to think on and then take a closer look at it tomorrow.

[Deus Naturae]

Interesting article. Paragraphs 3-4 are most relevant. If it's set up right, the damn thing will pay for itself. I think people are kind of panicking a little.

It's not just price gouging and things like that, that's bad enough, but rather the stranglehold that the private sector and "big oil" have on policymaking.

Well, there's much to think on and then take a closer look at it tomorrow.

No one is saying that it won't pay for itself. The way it's designed, it will have to pay for itself...by increasing rates dramatically.

Can you give an example of this stranglehold in Atlasia?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Interesting article. Paragraphs 3-4 are most relevant. If it's set up right, the damn thing will pay for itself. I think people are kind of panicking a little.

It's not just price gouging and things like that, that's bad enough, but rather the stranglehold that the private sector and "big oil" have on policymaking.

Well, there's much to think on and then take a closer look at it tomorrow.

Again, big-oil is one element of this mix and only one of many that needs to be considered.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

The most bizarre thing, to me at least, is that the senate lacked no real reason to do this. I understand TNF's objective - he hates private industry, which is fine, he's a communist and he wants Atlasia to become a marxist utopian. But the rest, I really don't.

What no one could answer is why this is necessary. At present, energy companies make about an 8% profit margin on their services. 8%. If we define price gauging as "making a profit" then okay, I can see the argument. However, last time I checked, making a profit is not illegal in Atlasia. No one was able to answer how this system would deal with the rising energy costs and further, the effect factoring in the rising wages for all the workers who would become unionized under such a takeover would have on overall rates. After watching its defenders use a series of straw men to justify their odd conclusions, including, bizarrely, a comparison to the high priced and low supply Pennsylvania liquor system to justify why we need to do this. It became clear to me that no one voting for the bill knew what was going on at all, and these men were about to nationalize 10% of our economy!

And don't get me started on the "socialism" mantra. It is becoming far more of a cult type thing than anything else, where one must follow the ideals of "socialism" at all costs, even when a problem can be solved by cheaper and more effective means. The senate seems to have come to their sense now, but this is the second time in more than a week where it was seriously debating issues that nearly 70% of the public opposed That's pretty striking to me as a lowly private citizen.

[President Tyrion]

The senate seems to have come to their sense now, but this is the second time in more than a week where it was seriously debating issues that nearly 70% of the public opposed That's pretty striking to me as a lowly private citizen.

Pretty sharp rhetoric for you, Duke.

I think the 70% figure is an especially egregious twist on the events, specifically with respect to Party List voting. Party List was brought up, there was a poll, and then we immediately scrapped it. How is that at all a valid criticism of the government? If anything, we did our jobs rather admirably on that front.

And is 70% some sort of benchmark now? I'm sure I can find a vote where you were in a "superminority". Should the Senate not even debate such an issue?

There are some legitimate concerns to be stated, but this is a rather baffling position.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Maybe so, I was a bit unfair to bring that up because you all did scrap that after the poll results were released, but the whole debate yesterday on the Fuel bill was just baffling to me.

I am happy it has finally been put to rest. I suppose in the end, we do get it right, but a good controversy is good for Atlasia, as it always have been.