Stop Corporate Imperialism Act
-
I cannot in good conciounse support an act that punished organisations for following principles like making sure all workers have enough to live and leisure time in their own nation. That is not civilising that is just treating your workers as a human being. May I suggest any company that cannot afford to give its workers a good life should maybe not exist and that what should be prioritised is fair trade as well development aid from governments to less well off nations. You are describing a company paying its workers a high wage as a serious breach of sovereignty , I fear this may achieve the opposite of what you want if it passed , ethical companies would leave countries for fear of being penalised for doing the right thing and ensuring workers can have a good decent life on the wage they offer while poverty wage employers will be left and can undercut any producers in the area anyway. the best approach should be to stop the race to the bottom in standards and labour rights and fight those companies. Lets not penalise companies for basically making sure their workers have a good life or ensuring workers get extra support from a welfare fund if they get ill and good acts treating their workers as human beings. I do not buy from companies that do not do this and it would be a tragedy and perverse if companies like these were locked out while poverty wage employers still able to operate. You act could actually lower standards in countries where governments do not set their minimum or living wages high enough, that is bad for workers and bad for society.
Skye Hook, Councillor for United Duchies
-
Therefore the domestic company, the small shopkeeper, perhaps - they should not exist because they do not meet your standards? Your ethical company, your fair trade - they are really exploiters, who will take over the economy of a country and deny it the right to develop by itself.
These companies that you name are reprehensible as well, but their actions, at the very least, do not threaten the very sovereignty of a nation. With the strengthening of labor unions, with legislation spearheaded at the EU level, these other exploiters will weaken themselves.
The theme of the civilizing mission is again repeated; and again, it must be said that it is the prerogative of no one but the people of a nation itself to decide what their wages should be - certainly not a foreign corporation!
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
A domestic shopkeeper chooses his salaries and margins if they were to hire someone outside the family they should of course pay them a fair living wage since if they can't they would only be gaining profits off peoples misery and poverty. Its frankly disgusting that the representitive from a so called socialist nation has introduced an act that will if it passes lose many people well paying jobs and make them jobless as ethical companies withdraw or result in poverty level wages becoming the new norm in low income countries in Europe making a rising well paid working class and middle class impossible also hampering economic growth while benefitting richer nations citizens through lower prices achieved off the backs of these new near slave workers. Companies should pay ethical wages and prices and those that can't shouldn't be in business it really is that simple whether the company is foreign or domestic. We don't punish firms who come in the Duchies and pay higher wages than a firm when one of ours loses workers to them we tell our firms to pay more money to match that rate if they want to keep the workers. This should be the same approach in all countries setting limits on what people can earn like this will only keep wages lower.
When a company pays a higher wage or bonus you know what happens? People on middle or lower incomes spend it so every Euro extra going into that pay packet boosts the economy, every Euroe going to very highly paid people is more likely to be saved and tucked away in an account lost to the economy impoverishing the country , every time a fair living wage is paid that can support a domestic holiday or even foreign one the nation gets extra GDP. This is basic economics, lower wages are bad for economies according to economists since less money paid to lower workers means their consumption has to be lower. If you were really interested in a strong economy and working class you'd support higher wages for the lower and middle income workers, since it would boost the economy and reduce poverty. If you want evidence of this look through the many economies in Europe who have this model and how unequal societies are having lower GDP per capita and growth in that metric precisely because the rich there hoard the money. All this is doing is helping vulture cappitalism by destroying ethical Cappitalism. If a Business chooses to pay a living wage and minimum profitable price for suppliers then it should not only be allowed but encouraged to do so, we should be encouraging more companies in all countries to sign up for said schemes like Fair Trade Europe and Fair Wage Europe not destroying their models of operating.
Skye Hook , Deputy Councillor for United Duchies
-
The point of socialism is to give the working class control over itself, not to allow corporations to dictate to workers what they want or how their economy may develop. Regardless, my country is not socialist in any way or form.
Increases in wages and in conditions must occur organically because of the struggle of the working class; they must not occur because of the whims of a foreign business. You speak of people having more money to consume; but you interestingly do not comment on where they will consume with this money. The company which engages in the behavior I have described will inevitable monopolize the retail market, and thus people will be forced to consume there. "Ethicality" becomes merely another way to earn profit, to exploit. Better that it is sharper, more obvious, than covered in this poisonous honey.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
The Empire of Inimicus will naturally oppose this Act and and any further proposals to legitimise the scourge of communism in this Union.
Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker -
The Union of Duxburian Dominions also opposes saddling the entire EU with bizarre socialist grievances. This is not what the EU is for.
Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union -
This act has no ideology but that of sovereignty in mind. There is a company within the Union which goes to the underdeveloped nations and employs monopolistic practices. Employees are drawn to them, suppliers are drawn to them, and thus the domestic economy is left unable to compete. Everyone can only buy from them, everyone can only sell to them; and therefore it has established its hegemony, with which it can - and openly does try to - influence the social and political environment of the nation in question.
This is disgusting and is the equivalent of war. We as a Union stand against wars between states; therefore we should stand against war between a state and a company as equally hell-bent on subjugating the state in question to its own political agenda.
Debate shall be extended until 05:29 GMT on 9 February 2022.
Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
Debate has ended. Voting on amendments will begin and continue until 22:50 GMT on the 14th of February, 2022. There are THREE amendments, one of which was proposed by me and two of which were proposed by Cllr. Skye Hook. Amendments I and II are in contradiction.
AMENDMENT I
DEFINITIONS
- Economic imperialism - activity which results in the establishment of the hegemony and control of a foreign organization over the economy of a state or states
2. Living wage - wage which is able to pay for the housing, food, and clothing needed for a family of average size within a given country to survive, and no more
AMENDMENT II
DEFINITIONS
Economic imperialism - activity which results in the establishment of the hegemony and control of a foreign organization over the economy of a state or states
2. Living wage - wage which is able to pay for the housing, childcare, healthcare , utilities, transport , reasonable leisure expenses such as a domestic holiday for 7 days, food, and clothing needed for a family of average size within a given country to survive, and no moreAMENDMENT III
SECTION II. ENFORCEMENT
I. Acts of economic imperialism which take place in two or more memberstates or are enshrined in the policy of the organization committing said imperialism are declared illegal in the European Union.
II. Acts of economic imperialism which take place in two or more memberstates or are enshrined in the policy of the organization committing said imperialism are to be actively litigated by the European Commission.
a) The European Commission is bound to file a case with the European Court of Justice in the following two scenarios:
a) That two member-states take a petition to the European Commission officially alleging an act of economic imperialism to have been committed in both by a single organization
b) That the European Commission discovers or is given evidence by any actor that an organization enshrines the committing of acts of economic imperialism as a part of its official policy
III. If the European Court of Justice finds an organization guilty of an act of economic imperialism, the organization may be fined an amount set by the court up to 10% of revenue in the countries for the period. If these are not paid assets may be seized.Any organisation must fix the policy within 6 months to reflect the ruling.is to be dissolved utside of the country where it is headquartered. Its assets outside of this country are to be given to the ownership of the government of the country in which the assets were located, which may dispose of them as it chooses.
IV. The European Court of Justice may also require the organization in question to pay fines of any amount to the member-states in which acts of economic imperialism were committed, and may also sentence members of the leadership of said organization seen as directly culpable for the act or acts of economic imperialism to up to five years in prison.Iras TIlkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen - Economic imperialism - activity which results in the establishment of the hegemony and control of a foreign organization over the economy of a state or states
-
The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST Amendments I and II, and FOR Amendment III.
Nicholas Benfield
Deputy SpeakerThe Empire of Inimicus
Head of State/Government: Emperor Artabanos (EU Hall of Fame 2021)
Vicarius (Deputy): Wilfred Cocx
Deputy Speaker of the European Council: Nicholas Benfield -
On behalf of United Duchies I vote for ammendments II and III and against Amendment I.
Skye Hook , Deputy Councillor for United Duchies
-
I vote FOR Amendment III and AGAINST Amendments I and II.
Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain -
I vote FOR Amendment I and AGAINST Amendments II and III.
Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista -
I vote FOR Amendment I and AGAINST Amendments II and III.
Václav Kohout
Councillor for Czech Slavia -
With three votes against and two in favor, Amendment I has FAILED.
With four votes against and one in favor, Amendment II has FAILED.
With two votes against and one three in favor, Amendment III has PASSED.
The amendment that has passed is vague in nature and would completely undermine the purpose of this act. While there has been significant debate on this subject, this act would, if passed, cause significant legal dysfunction. Therefore, I now withdraw it. While I intend to propose another motion or act for roughly the same purpose, but changed as to reflect some of the concerns expressed, and therefore debate has not occurred in vain, I deeply apologize to all.
Iras TIlkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen -
Locked by
Istkalen -
Unlocked by Istkalen
The Kingdom of Spain
