Policy on Infrastructure Development

Propose and review new legislative variables for the game.

Policy on Infrastructure Development

Postby Farsun » Mon Jul 20, 2015 11:50 pm

Name of the Law/Policy: Policy on Infrastructure Development
Law/Policy Category: Infrastructure

Options:
+3) The national government actively develops infrastructure through government agencies;
+2) The national government actively develops infrastructure with contracts to nationally owned companies;
+1) The national government actively develops infrastructure with contracts to nationally owned and private companies;
0) The government does not maintain a policy on infrastructure development (default);
-1) The national government actively develops infrastructure with local governments
The national government oversees infrastructure development by local governments
-2) The national government oversees infrastructure development by local governments
-3) Local governments are responsible for all infrastructure development
-4) Neither the national government nor local governments maintain infrastructure

Effects:
+3) Large increase in: Centralization, Big Government and Regulation
+2) Medium increase in: Centralization, Big Government and Regulation
+1) Medium increase in: Centralization, Big Government and Capitalism
0) NULL
-1) Small increase in: Devolution and Small Government
-2) Medium increase in: Devolution and Small Government
-3) Large increase in: Devolution and Small Government
-4) Massive increase in: Devolution and Small Government
Dorvish Social Nationalist Party
OOC Administrator of the Artanian Union & Bureaucrat of the Particracy Wiki
Farsun
 
Posts: 2113
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:47 pm
Location: New York, United States.

Re: Policy on Infrastructure Development

Postby Aquinas » Thu Jul 23, 2015 1:19 pm

I've been thinking about this one. Like Farsun, I'd love to see some more laws available about infrastructure. Without infrastructure, I'm not sure how much of modern civilisation we would have left!

This one is interesting. Generally speaking I tend to prefer options which are reasonably broad rather than too specific, but as I see it, the weakness in this proposal as it appears at the moment is that it is too broad. Under the "Infrastructure" category we already have laws applying to different aspects of infrastructure, like energy generation, highways, nuclear power, postal services and trains. So at least to my eyes...we need to try and make this one more focussed.

Reading your post about infrastructure inspired me to do some digging, and I've found this one, which was produced more than 5 years ago but might have potential...

Name of the Law/Policy: Government policy on airports
Law/Policy Catagory: Infrastructure

Options:

1. The government does not have any policy on airports
2. The government owns and operates all airports
3. The government builds and operates airports but allow private airlines companies
4. The government leaves airports to the private industry
5. The government allows local governments to craft airport policy

Effects:

1. No real effect; perhaps decrease in centralization
2. Increase in centralization, market regulation, and government responsibilities.
3. Increase in government responsibilities
4. Increase in market capitalism
5. Increase in devolution and small government


I've not had time to think/go through that thoroughly myself yet...but what do you reckon?
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Policy on Infrastructure Development

Postby Farsun » Thu Jul 23, 2015 2:35 pm

Yeah, I was actually driving down the road the other day and saw my local town doing work and it just inspired me to write the law lmao

Also this one is focused really on highways and vehicular transportation methods, I guess I should've mentioned that seeing as we do not have anything to do with roadways or anything. When applied in that light, it gets way more specific.

Name of the Law/Policy: Government policy on airports
Law/Policy Category: Infrastructure

Options:
+3. The government owns and operates all airports with only the national flag carrier permitted to use airports.
+2. The government owns and builds airports and private airlines are only permitted to use them.
+1. The government owns and builds airports but contracts with private airlines to rent hubs within the airport.
0. The government has no policy on airport construction and leaves it entirely to private industry (default)
-1. The government cooperates side by side with private industry to construct airports.
-2. The government allows local governments to develop their own airport policies and guidelines.
-3. The government does not allow the construction of airports.


Effects:
+3. Massive increase in: centralization, regulation
+2. Medium increase in: centralization
+1. Small increase in: centralization, capitalism
0. No effect
-1. Small increase in: devolution, capitalism
-2. Medium increase in: Devolution
-3. Massive increase in: restrictive civil rights, isolationism

WITH THAT it spurs me to believe we need this then

Name of the Law/Policy: Airport security policy
Law/Policy Category: Infrastructure

Options:
+2. Airport security is handled by the military.
+1. Airport security is handled by the national police.
0. Airport security is handled by a designated government agency. (default)
-1. Airport security is handled by private companies.
-2. Airport security is devolved to local governments to decide.

Effects:
+2. Medium increase in: Aggressive military, centralization
+1. Small increase in: Aggressive military, centralization
0. No effect
-1. Small increase in: Devolution, capitalism, aggressive military
-2. Medium increase in: Devolution
Dorvish Social Nationalist Party
OOC Administrator of the Artanian Union & Bureaucrat of the Particracy Wiki
Farsun
 
Posts: 2113
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:47 pm
Location: New York, United States.

Re: Policy on Infrastructure Development

Postby Aquinas » Thu Jul 23, 2015 8:27 pm

We are getting some good ideas now.

Come on Aquinas, put your thinking cap on...

Hmm...

With the airports one, I think it would be better if we separated airports from airlines. I also think Farsun's suggestion for the option to ban airports is brilliant, because that's very "hot topic" - lots of environmentalists are very opposed to air travel.

I also think the options should be pared down a bit, if we can, to keep it simple.

Not sure about the local government option, since running an airport is rather a big project for a local council. A regional government or a big city government might do that, but they aren't institutionalised in Particracy.

So my latest draft:

Name of the Law/Policy: Government policy on airports
Law/Policy Category: Infrastructure

Options:

1. The government owns and operates all airports.
2. The government has some involvement in the ownership and operation of airports, but leaves a role for the private sector too.
3. The government leaves airports entirely to the private sector.
4. Airports are banned.


Number 2 tries to leave room for the public-private partnership ideas Farsun mentioned.

Thoughts?
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Policy on Infrastructure Development

Postby Darkylightytwo » Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:13 pm

I approve this idea, good on
Darkylightytwo
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 6:27 am


Return to Laws

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests