SB 115-28 Atlasian Steel Act (Tabled)

[LAKISYLVANIA]

AN ACT
To nationalize the steel industry

Be it enacted by the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia

Section 1. Title

This legislation may be cited as the Atlasian Steel Act.

Section 2. Nationalization

1. All steel manufacturers are brought into public ownership immediately upon passage of this act and shall be placed under the control of an Atlasian Steel Authority.

2. To complete the undertaking as outlined above, the Republic of Atlasia shall establish an Atlasian Steel Authority (hereafter ASA) which shall be comprised of all former privately-held steel companies and shall hold a legal monopoly in these sectors.

3. The purpose of the aforementioned ASA shall be the economization of operations and the modernization of production methods to raise safety and efficiency standards across the country, as well as provide steel at a low cost, prevent competitive waste, and co-ordinate research and development in those sectors.

4. The government of the ASA shall be federal and cooperative. In each region will be established a regional steel authority under a board of directors composed of representatives of labor, the consumers, security, and the environment. The number of labor directors shall be four, and the number of directors for all other constituencies shall be two. Each regional authority will elect five representatives to the national board of directors. Two of the national directors elected by each regional authority shall represent labor, and one each shall represent the consumers, security, and the environment.
 
5. The labor directors shall be chosen by a vote of the steel workers; the consumer directors by a vote of the regional legislature, the security and environment directors by the regional executive at the regional level and by the president at the federal level.

6. The term of a Board director shall be four years.

7. The President shall appoint a Chair of the ASA Board of Directors who shall have no vote unless they are equally divided. The Chair shall serve a four year term.

8. All persons owning any of the aforementioned industry brought into public ownership shall be fairly compensated for the sale of said industries to the Republic of Atlasia.

Sponsor: Laki, on behalf of WD

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The government should not be in the business of making steel.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I opposed this last time and I'll oppose it this time. All steel nationalization does is force the government to undertake a bad investment.

Once the issue with the South is resolved, I'm just going to submit my NAFTA fix-it bill. That and a more aggressive approach to China on the trade issue will help domestic steel. This won't.

[West_Midlander]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

What does nationalisation have to do with lockdowns. Both aren't even remotely linked.

Secondly, nationalization doesn't have anything to do with authoritarian states. Railroads are nationalized in Belgium and many other European nations. Are they authoritarian.

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

TNF called, he wants his everything back.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem with that argument is that, it never ends. Food is essential for survival, so we are going to nationalize the supermarkets too? The farms? Clothing is essential, are we going to nationalize Nike, Wrangler and Polo?

The whole "it is essential" argument for nationalization is a load of crap. Many things are essential. What it comes down to it, is a lack of faith in the ability of people to make decisions for themselves and instead the view that "people must be protected from themselves" by having everything done by the government.

I am all for a public education system sure, but at the same time in many locations, the government has a horrible track record, hence the demand for school choice in those areas. I guess we just force everyone back into that system and "maybe we will fix it later", because it is the gov't and it can be trusted.

When it comes to food, we have established many times over that the most efficient way, to feed the most people is by giving people food stamps (a voucher) to go into a private supermarket and buy groceries often made on a privately owned farm. Sometimes maybe the farm is a cooperative, in which case that is fine also. The point is the system works, and the only ones IRL in recent times to assail that system are people on the right who want to distribute Soviet Union style bags of rice and beans.

On healthcare, we have a market competing public option with all of the enabled powers to negotiate prices and leverage down costs through its vast size and reach. People receive assistance to pay the premiums on this plan on the basis of a sliding scale subsidy. We trust people to make decisions and still managed to shift the incentives to push in all the right directions. A system built thanks to the collaborative efforts of not only myself, but also AHDuke99, Shua, and Lumine pre-reset, and resumed and continued post reset by Scott, DFW, PiT, Goldwater, most recently Mongoose and many others as well.

Our steel industry was once the world leader and it achieve that while being privately owned and operated. Our gov't through a combination of regulations, lack of pro-industrial policies on taxes, trade and infrastructure investment, and a general disregard for domestic productive capabilities, was allowed to wither on the vine.

We are not going to save the steel industry by turning into a zombiefied sector, carried along only by the taxpayers as it creates ever less competitive and ever lower quality steel, until finally taxpayers say enough and it is allowed to die. This is not the road to saving the steel industry, this declares it terminal and puts it on life support.

Senator Scott has a much better concept for how to revive and support a steel industry, without taking this radically centralist step.

 

[West_Midlander]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

What does nationalisation have to do with lockdowns. Both aren't even remotely linked.

Secondly, nationalization doesn't have anything to do with authoritarian states. Railroads are nationalized in Belgium and many other European nations. Are they authoritarian.

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

Plain and simple. If government controls everything "essential" if democracy ends in a country the people have no immediate recourse. Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century. As long as it remains wholly possible for democracy and individual rights to be turned back by any government, no matter the legislative and constitutional hurdles, we cannot have full-scale nationalization. I'm not opposed to the government entering various markets to encourage competition, along with cracking down on monopolies, but the government should not have a majority or total stake in the vast majority of markets nor should it achieve such through nationalization of already private businesses. Nationalization is also fundamentally anti-Atlasian and anti-liberty since it goes against the idea of private property and the sanctity of such since the sale of private property is forced, at the government rate, under nationalization. More actors in the market, including the government in some cases, will also encourage consumer choice, competition, reduced costs, efficiency, and technological innovations. Nationalization or monopoly is like expecting one to have all the answers instead of knowing that one cannot have all the answers and that thus a team generally works better and produces a finer, more advanced product. Many items have been the creation of one but highly developed projects are group efforts. Finally, if the government, for example, cannot afford to pay at the highest private wage in an industry, at least for some workers, then ingenuity and development will suffer.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Look, there's nothing about nationalizing steel industry that suggest we are planning on creating a dictatorship that kills 10 million people...

If we're gonna use "red scare tactics", just remember that i'm alive and that i'm writing my free opinion from hellish Europe.

[West_Midlander]

Look, there's nothing about nationalizing steel industry that suggest we are planning on creating a dictatorship that kills 10 million people...

What a dismissive point. The point is if it happened, the people would have little recourse if we realize your dream of as much nationalization as possible.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Look, there's nothing about nationalizing steel industry that suggest we are planning on creating a dictatorship that kills 10 million people...

What a dismissive point. The point is if it happened, the people would have little recourse if we realize your dream of as much nationalization as possible.

It is dismissive because I am being dismissive. I just don't participate in authoritarian / communist fearmongering, while most importantly it doesn't even have anything to do with it.

[WD]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

[West_Midlander]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

[Utah Neolib]

AN ACT
To nationalize the steel industry

Be it enacted by the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia

Section 1. Title

This legislation may be cited as the Atlasian Steel Act.

Section 2. Nationalization

1. All 25% of all steel manufacturers are brought into public ownership immediately upon passage of this act and shall be placed under the control of an Atlasian Steel Authority.

2. To complete the undertaking as outlined above, the Republic of Atlasia shall establish an Atlasian Steel Authority (hereafter ASA) which shall be comprised of all former privately-held steel companies and shall hold a legal monopoly in these sectors.

3. The purpose of the aforementioned ASA shall be the economization of operations and the modernization of production methods to raise safety and efficiency standards across the country, as well as provide steel at a low cost, prevent competitive waste, and co-ordinate research and development in those sectors.

4. The government of the ASA shall be federal and cooperative. In each region will be established a regional steel authority under a board of directors composed of representatives of labor, the consumers, security, and the environment. The number of labor directors shall be four, and the number of directors for all other constituencies shall be two. Each regional authority will elect five representatives to the national board of directors. Two of the national directors elected by each regional authority shall represent labor, and one each shall represent the consumers, security, and the environment.
 
5. The labor directors shall be chosen by a vote of the steel workers; the consumer directors by a vote of the regional legislature, the security and environment directors by the regional executive at the regional level and by the president at the federal level.

6. The term of a Board director shall be four years. [/s] [/s]

7. The President shall appoint a Chair of the ASA Board of Directors who shall have no vote unless they are equally divided. The Chair shall serve a four year term.

8. All persons owning any of the aforementioned industry brought into public ownership shall be fairly compensated for the sale of said industries to the Republic of Atlasia.

[/quote]

[WD]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

Refusing to acknowledge the failures of the “Free Market” and burying our heads in the sand as to its consequences is a common thread of neoliberals, yes. There’s a very simple choice before the Senate; The Status Quo, which has seen a decline in our industry, our steel jobs, and the communities which they support, or they can pursue change. The government can step in do it’s job: correct the errors and violence of the so-called Free Market, which has made the steel industry one of its many victims. I’ve heard no concrete alternative presented, rather that we shouldn’t dare to do anything to protect Atlasian industry, because that would be “radical”, “centralism”, “anti-liberty”, or “authoritarian”. This claptrap aside, one must do nothing more than ask themselves: Who do you trust to exert influence and authority over the commanding heights of the economy? The private monopoly capital bosses who are accountable to none, or the elected government of this Republic, which answers to and works for the people. This is fundamentally putting our industry in the hands of the people.

In addition, I would briefly add that nationalization of our steel is a matter of national security. We’ve just faced a great assault on our union, an attempt to destroy and usurp the constitution: War was a very real possibility. In the event that another future secessionist movement sparks violence, and attempts to leave the union do we want to leave vast quantities of Atlasian steel lying around for seizing by a rebellious government? I think not. With full control over our steel, that will not be a concern. When voting on this bill, Senators must consider how much safer this will make Atlasia.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

Ow ow ow...

1. Christian Man hasn't even stated approval or disapproval of the bill. I'm sure the senator is able to form an independent opinion without you deciding what his opinion shall be like.

2. "The Bill is opposed by Peace Party members" is objectively a wrong take. The only one who've spoken against the bill is Scott. I have spoken in favour of the bill and i'm a Peace member as well.

3. Your arguments are very neoliberal-esque. I don't care about your ideology or the ideology of others, but they are from a neoliberal perspective (even if you don't identify as such).

4. And when you suddenly talk about millions of deaths and start comparing us to USSR etc. for nationalizing steel or nationalizing railroads, than I would say that is a very dishonest way of argueing.

[Sirius_]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

Ow ow ow...

1. Christian Man hasn't even stated approval or disapproval of the bill. I'm sure the senator is able to form an independent opinion without you deciding what his opinion shall be like.

2. "The Bill is opposed by Peace Party members" is objectively a wrong take. The only one who've spoken against the bill is Scott. I have spoken in favour of the bill and i'm a Peace member as well.

3. Your arguments are very neoliberal-esque. I don't care about your ideology or the ideology of others, but they are from a neoliberal perspective (even if you don't identify as such).

4. And when you suddenly talk about millions of deaths and start comparing us to USSR etc. for nationalizing steel or nationalizing railroads, than I would say that is a very dishonest way of argueing.

Christian Man has recommended Yankee's posts in opposition to this bill, so he likely is opposed. And "neoliberal perspective" isn't a substantive counter argument, merely stating that the so-called "neoliberals" agree with the opposing arguments.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

What does nationalisation have to do with lockdowns. Both aren't even remotely linked.

Secondly, nationalization doesn't have anything to do with authoritarian states. Railroads are nationalized in Belgium and many other European nations. Are they authoritarian.

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

Plain and simple. If government controls everything "essential" if democracy ends in a country the people have no immediate recourse. Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century. As long as it remains wholly possible for democracy and individual rights to be turned back by any government, no matter the legislative and constitutional hurdles, we cannot have full-scale nationalization. I'm not opposed to the government entering various markets to encourage competition, along with cracking down on monopolies, but the government should not have a majority or total stake in the vast majority of markets nor should it achieve such through nationalization of already private businesses. Nationalization is also fundamentally anti-Atlasian and anti-liberty since it goes against the idea of private property and the sanctity of such since the sale of private property is forced, at the government rate, under nationalization. More actors in the market, including the government in some cases, will also encourage consumer choice, competition, reduced costs, efficiency, and technological innovations. Nationalization or monopoly is like expecting one to have all the answers instead of knowing that one cannot have all the answers and that thus a team generally works better and produces a finer, more advanced product. Many items have been the creation of one but highly developed projects are group efforts. Finally, if the government, for example, cannot afford to pay at the highest private wage in an industry, at least for some workers, then ingenuity and development will suffer.

You act as you're trying to be consumer friendly but we're talking here about the "steel industry". Have you ever gone to a grocery shop or whatever shop to buy raw amounts of steel? The only consumers here are other companies specializing in manufacturing industries, among a lot of those - most, if not all - are in fact privately owned industries.

So by definition, by nationalizing steel (if we don't nationalizing manufacturing industries as well), there is no monopoly at all.

Applies to NCY's argument of "are we going to nationalize Nike etc. as well". It's not helpful if we generalize all industries, it is important to know about what kind of industry we are talking about. And no-one has said anything about nationalizing those.

I even doubt there is much of a privately owned steel industry in Atlasia, given all those jobs probably are already gone to low income countries, because they are cheaper to employ than atlasian labour forces.

The result is higher amount of unemployed people, in particular for people without high school education, higher crime rates, higher degree of homelessness, increased drug trafficking and demand, more stigmatization/hate towards immigrants and more of a strain on the national budget and in particular expenses to maintaining the welfare state.

Nationalizing our steel industry will not contribute to anything to your highly out of proportion concerns, and will revitalize our economy and increase our GDP.

[West_Midlander]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

Ow ow ow...

1. Christian Man hasn't even stated approval or disapproval of the bill. I'm sure the senator is able to form an independent opinion without you deciding what his opinion shall be like.

2. "The Bill is opposed by Peace Party members" is objectively a wrong take. The only one who've spoken against the bill is Scott. I have spoken in favour of the bill and i'm a Peace member as well.

3. Your arguments are very neoliberal-esque. I don't care about your ideology or the ideology of others, but they are from a neoliberal perspective (even if you don't identify as such).

4. And when you suddenly talk about millions of deaths and start comparing us to USSR etc. for nationalizing steel or nationalizing railroads, than I would say that is a very dishonest way of argueing.

Ignoring Christian Man's recommendations is willful ignorance and since he and Scott are both opposed at least a part of the party is opposed, nullifying your second "point" as well. Anti-communism and/or anti-nationalization is not inherently neoliberal but go on. I never suggested that deaths will come from nationalization itself, it just removes a safeguard for the people and their rights, their self-defense, etc. But if you must misrepresent my words to make yourself feel better, I can't stop you.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

Ow ow ow...

1. Christian Man hasn't even stated approval or disapproval of the bill. I'm sure the senator is able to form an independent opinion without you deciding what his opinion shall be like.

2. "The Bill is opposed by Peace Party members" is objectively a wrong take. The only one who've spoken against the bill is Scott. I have spoken in favour of the bill and i'm a Peace member as well.

3. Your arguments are very neoliberal-esque. I don't care about your ideology or the ideology of others, but they are from a neoliberal perspective (even if you don't identify as such).

4. And when you suddenly talk about millions of deaths and start comparing us to USSR etc. for nationalizing steel or nationalizing railroads, than I would say that is a very dishonest way of argueing.

Ignoring Christian Man's recommendations is willful ignorance and since he and Scott are both opposed at least a part of the party is opposed, nullifying your second "point" as well. Anti-communism and/or anti-nationalization is not inherently neoliberal but go on. I never suggested that deaths will come from nationalization itself, it just removes a safeguard for the people and their rights, their self-defense, etc. But if you must misrepresent my words to make yourself feel better, I can't stop you.

MB recced my post, also a Peace member. So at the very least you should say Peace is divided, not in favour of your proposal.

Secondly, a recommendation is just a recommendation. It isn't a post where one expresses their opinion. I've recced posts before not necessarily because I agree with them but for other reasons. Secondly, not everyone clicks to see what users have recommended a certain post.

This has nothing to do with "communism". Nobody called Reactionary's bills fascist too? And it is the same thing.

And yes you did mention it

Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century.

It was completely out of proportion to even suggest it. This is not turning or misrepresenting words, you talk about "tens of millions dead" somewhere where there is absolutely no link. It is unnecessary and laughable.

[West_Midlander]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

What does nationalisation have to do with lockdowns. Both aren't even remotely linked.

Secondly, nationalization doesn't have anything to do with authoritarian states. Railroads are nationalized in Belgium and many other European nations. Are they authoritarian.

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

Plain and simple. If government controls everything "essential" if democracy ends in a country the people have no immediate recourse. Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century. As long as it remains wholly possible for democracy and individual rights to be turned back by any government, no matter the legislative and constitutional hurdles, we cannot have full-scale nationalization. I'm not opposed to the government entering various markets to encourage competition, along with cracking down on monopolies, but the government should not have a majority or total stake in the vast majority of markets nor should it achieve such through nationalization of already private businesses. Nationalization is also fundamentally anti-Atlasian and anti-liberty since it goes against the idea of private property and the sanctity of such since the sale of private property is forced, at the government rate, under nationalization. More actors in the market, including the government in some cases, will also encourage consumer choice, competition, reduced costs, efficiency, and technological innovations. Nationalization or monopoly is like expecting one to have all the answers instead of knowing that one cannot have all the answers and that thus a team generally works better and produces a finer, more advanced product. Many items have been the creation of one but highly developed projects are group efforts. Finally, if the government, for example, cannot afford to pay at the highest private wage in an industry, at least for some workers, then ingenuity and development will suffer.

You act as you're trying to be consumer friendly but we're talking here about the "steel industry". Have you ever gone to a grocery shop or whatever shop to buy raw amounts of steel? The only consumers here are other companies specializing in manufacturing industries, among a lot of those - most, if not all - are in fact privately owned industries.

So by definition, by nationalizing steel (if we don't nationalizing manufacturing industries as well), there is no monopoly at all.

Applies to NCY's argument of "are we going to nationalize Nike etc. as well". It's not helpful if we generalize all industries, it is important to know about what kind of industry we are talking about. And no-one has said anything about nationalizing those.

I even doubt there is much of a privately owned steel industry in Atlasia, given all those jobs probably are already gone to low income countries, because they are cheaper to employ than atlasian labour forces.

The result is higher amount of unemployed people, in particular for people without high school education, higher crime rates, higher degree of homelessness, increased drug trafficking and demand, more stigmatization/hate towards immigrants and more of a strain on the national budget and in particular expenses to maintaining the welfare state.

Nationalizing our steel industry will not contribute to anything to your highly out of proportion concerns, and will revitalize our economy and increase our GDP.

Do you know what a monopoly is? A government monopoly in any industry reduces competition and thus efficiency and technological advancement since government wages often can't keep pace at least at the highest levels with what the private market can offer. The steel industry also is connected to many other industries so pretending that it has nothing to do with the people so it can't be a (state) monopoly is a strange argument.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

What does nationalisation have to do with lockdowns. Both aren't even remotely linked.

Secondly, nationalization doesn't have anything to do with authoritarian states. Railroads are nationalized in Belgium and many other European nations. Are they authoritarian.

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

Plain and simple. If government controls everything "essential" if democracy ends in a country the people have no immediate recourse. Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century. As long as it remains wholly possible for democracy and individual rights to be turned back by any government, no matter the legislative and constitutional hurdles, we cannot have full-scale nationalization. I'm not opposed to the government entering various markets to encourage competition, along with cracking down on monopolies, but the government should not have a majority or total stake in the vast majority of markets nor should it achieve such through nationalization of already private businesses. Nationalization is also fundamentally anti-Atlasian and anti-liberty since it goes against the idea of private property and the sanctity of such since the sale of private property is forced, at the government rate, under nationalization. More actors in the market, including the government in some cases, will also encourage consumer choice, competition, reduced costs, efficiency, and technological innovations. Nationalization or monopoly is like expecting one to have all the answers instead of knowing that one cannot have all the answers and that thus a team generally works better and produces a finer, more advanced product. Many items have been the creation of one but highly developed projects are group efforts. Finally, if the government, for example, cannot afford to pay at the highest private wage in an industry, at least for some workers, then ingenuity and development will suffer.

You act as you're trying to be consumer friendly but we're talking here about the "steel industry". Have you ever gone to a grocery shop or whatever shop to buy raw amounts of steel? The only consumers here are other companies specializing in manufacturing industries, among a lot of those - most, if not all - are in fact privately owned industries.

So by definition, by nationalizing steel (if we don't nationalizing manufacturing industries as well), there is no monopoly at all.

Applies to NCY's argument of "are we going to nationalize Nike etc. as well". It's not helpful if we generalize all industries, it is important to know about what kind of industry we are talking about. And no-one has said anything about nationalizing those.

I even doubt there is much of a privately owned steel industry in Atlasia, given all those jobs probably are already gone to low income countries, because they are cheaper to employ than atlasian labour forces.

The result is higher amount of unemployed people, in particular for people without high school education, higher crime rates, higher degree of homelessness, increased drug trafficking and demand, more stigmatization/hate towards immigrants and more of a strain on the national budget and in particular expenses to maintaining the welfare state.

Nationalizing our steel industry will not contribute to anything to your highly out of proportion concerns, and will revitalize our economy and increase our GDP.

Do you know what a monopoly is? A government monopoly in any industry reduces competition and thus efficiency and technological advancement since government wages often can't keep pace at least at the highest levels with what the private market can offer. The steel industry also is connected to many other industries so pretending that it has nothing to do with the people so it can't be a (state) monopoly is a strange argument.

It is connected to many other industries, which so far are all privatised. As i've said, you're not going to a shop to buy raw steel for yourself.

For the steel industry, there is no need for competition and more importantly there is still competition in other countries.

You all also don't seem to object privately owned monopolies.

[West_Midlander]

As the author of this bill, I will respond to the neoliberal nonsense posted above shortly.

If you think opposing nationalization across the board is neoliberalism, I don't know what to tell you. This bill is opposed by Peace Party members and noted non-neoliberals Christian Man and Scott, not to mention the non-neoliberal Federalist Party Senators and Yankee.

Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers"

Ow ow ow...

1. Christian Man hasn't even stated approval or disapproval of the bill. I'm sure the senator is able to form an independent opinion without you deciding what his opinion shall be like.

2. "The Bill is opposed by Peace Party members" is objectively a wrong take. The only one who've spoken against the bill is Scott. I have spoken in favour of the bill and i'm a Peace member as well.

3. Your arguments are very neoliberal-esque. I don't care about your ideology or the ideology of others, but they are from a neoliberal perspective (even if you don't identify as such).

4. And when you suddenly talk about millions of deaths and start comparing us to USSR etc. for nationalizing steel or nationalizing railroads, than I would say that is a very dishonest way of argueing.

Ignoring Christian Man's recommendations is willful ignorance and since he and Scott are both opposed at least a part of the party is opposed, nullifying your second "point" as well. Anti-communism and/or anti-nationalization is not inherently neoliberal but go on. I never suggested that deaths will come from nationalization itself, it just removes a safeguard for the people and their rights, their self-defense, etc. But if you must misrepresent my words to make yourself feel better, I can't stop you.

MB recced my post, also a Peace member. So at the very least you should say Peace is divided, not in favour of your proposal.

Secondly, a recommendation is just a recommendation. It isn't a post where one expresses their opinion. I've recced posts before not necessarily because I agree with them but for other reasons. Secondly, not everyone clicks to see what users have recommended a certain post.

This has nothing to do with "communism". Nobody called Reactionary's bills fascist too? And it is the same thing.

And yes you did mention it

Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century.

It was completely out of proportion to even suggest it. This is not turning or misrepresenting words, you talk about "tens of millions dead" somewhere where there is absolutely no link. It is unnecessary and laughable.

What a weak argument. Aren't you yourself a communist and a member of a communist party? Nationalization is not inherently communistic but when one favors it en masse like you do it is and it was done in many states that called themselves communist in the 20th century. I also said two Peace Party members, CM and Scott, oppose, not that the majority necessarily opposes it. My point was that the weak and undignified suggestion that all opponents are automatically neoliberals doesn't make sense. You are merely moving the goalposts.

I also never said or implied that nationalization causes genocide but it's a weakness of argument from you to choose that hill to die on, that I must have meant that, and that thus I am only fearmongering.

[West_Midlander]

I'm strongly supportive of this act. We need to nationalize more industries.

So you favor this, railroad nationalization, and as much nationalization as is possible yet you oppose lockdowns? How can you expect the government to act appropriately under the honor system when we have all seen the excesses of authoritarian states in the past and present all over the world? Division of economic and political power is what is needed to secure and protect the rights of the people. Private monopoly power and state monopoly power are twin dangers and threats to liberty.

What does nationalisation have to do with lockdowns. Both aren't even remotely linked.

Secondly, nationalization doesn't have anything to do with authoritarian states. Railroads are nationalized in Belgium and many other European nations. Are they authoritarian.

Essential industries important for the survival and welfare of our nation have to be nationalized, that includes energy, that includes public transport, that includes healthcare, education and prisons.

Plain and simple. If government controls everything "essential" if democracy ends in a country the people have no immediate recourse. Decades of struggle until the state collapses under its own weight and tens of millions are dead is not a viable strategy which was of course Eastern Europe's only option in the last century. As long as it remains wholly possible for democracy and individual rights to be turned back by any government, no matter the legislative and constitutional hurdles, we cannot have full-scale nationalization. I'm not opposed to the government entering various markets to encourage competition, along with cracking down on monopolies, but the government should not have a majority or total stake in the vast majority of markets nor should it achieve such through nationalization of already private businesses. Nationalization is also fundamentally anti-Atlasian and anti-liberty since it goes against the idea of private property and the sanctity of such since the sale of private property is forced, at the government rate, under nationalization. More actors in the market, including the government in some cases, will also encourage consumer choice, competition, reduced costs, efficiency, and technological innovations. Nationalization or monopoly is like expecting one to have all the answers instead of knowing that one cannot have all the answers and that thus a team generally works better and produces a finer, more advanced product. Many items have been the creation of one but highly developed projects are group efforts. Finally, if the government, for example, cannot afford to pay at the highest private wage in an industry, at least for some workers, then ingenuity and development will suffer.

You act as you're trying to be consumer friendly but we're talking here about the "steel industry". Have you ever gone to a grocery shop or whatever shop to buy raw amounts of steel? The only consumers here are other companies specializing in manufacturing industries, among a lot of those - most, if not all - are in fact privately owned industries.

So by definition, by nationalizing steel (if we don't nationalizing manufacturing industries as well), there is no monopoly at all.

Applies to NCY's argument of "are we going to nationalize Nike etc. as well". It's not helpful if we generalize all industries, it is important to know about what kind of industry we are talking about. And no-one has said anything about nationalizing those.

I even doubt there is much of a privately owned steel industry in Atlasia, given all those jobs probably are already gone to low income countries, because they are cheaper to employ than atlasian labour forces.

The result is higher amount of unemployed people, in particular for people without high school education, higher crime rates, higher degree of homelessness, increased drug trafficking and demand, more stigmatization/hate towards immigrants and more of a strain on the national budget and in particular expenses to maintaining the welfare state.

Nationalizing our steel industry will not contribute to anything to your highly out of proportion concerns, and will revitalize our economy and increase our GDP.

Do you know what a monopoly is? A government monopoly in any industry reduces competition and thus efficiency and technological advancement since government wages often can't keep pace at least at the highest levels with what the private market can offer. The steel industry also is connected to many other industries so pretending that it has nothing to do with the people so it can't be a (state) monopoly is a strange argument.

It is connected to many other industries, which so far are all privatised. As i've said, you're not going to a shop to buy raw steel for yourself.

For the steel industry, there is no need for competition and more importantly there is still competition in other countries.

You all also don't seem to object privately owned monopolies.

To suggest that I have ever supported or not opposed monopolies is total historical revisionism. To suggest that any industry, also, is "done" in terms of technological advancement so it can be nationalized doesn't make sense. Can't steel always become cheaper and stronger?