Asbestos Ban Bill
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 12:56:24 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Asbestos Ban Bill		 « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: Asbestos Ban Bill  (Read 5734 times)
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 11, 2005, 06:37:43 PM »
Nay!
Logged
Q
QQQQQQ
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,319


Political Matrix
E: 2.26, S: -4.88

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2005, 07:43:13 PM »
I'm still not exactly sure all of what asbestos does or what effects this would have, so Abstain for now.  It's a passive abstention, not a statement of any sort.
Logged
DanielX
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2005, 08:42:26 PM »
Nay.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2005, 02:13:00 AM »
Tiny GM warning (that no one may care about):

A bill like this would likely endanger most, if not all of the asbestos lawsuits and settlements that are still in effect or currently under litigation.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,648
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2005, 05:58:05 AM »
Aye
Logged
Defarge
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,588


Political Matrix
E: -3.13, S: -0.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2005, 01:51:02 PM »
Abstain (like Q, debate has not convinced me in either direction)
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2005, 02:18:14 PM »
Nay
Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,368
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 13, 2005, 08:12:27 PM »
Abstain
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,712
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 14, 2005, 09:18:19 AM »
Aye
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,648
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 17, 2005, 10:26:02 AM »
Bumping for other Senators.
Logged
Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 17, 2005, 05:50:31 PM »
The vote, having lasted more than five days, is hereby closed.

The amendment is rejected with two ayes and three noes.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,712
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 18, 2005, 01:41:09 PM »
Another large ammendment:

1. The Senate hereby bans the importation of Asbestos.
2. The Senate hereby bans the mining of Asbestos.
3. The Senate hereby bans the transportation of Asbestos without a permit.
4. The Senate hereby bans the sale of Asbestos within Atlasia.
5. The Senate hereby bans the use of Asbestos in the construction of products. 
6. Existing Asbestos related settlements will be unaffected by this act
Logged
Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 19, 2005, 03:21:42 PM »
Quote from: Senator Al on October 18, 2005, 01:41:09 PM
Another large ammendment:

1. The Senate hereby bans the importation of Asbestos.
2. The Senate hereby bans the mining of Asbestos.
3. The Senate hereby bans the transportation of Asbestos without a permit.
4. The Senate hereby bans the sale of Asbestos within Atlasia.
5. The Senate hereby bans the use of Asbestos in the construction of products. 
6. Existing Asbestos related settlements will be unaffected by this act

The question is on the above amendment. All those in favor, say Aye; those opposed, say No.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,648
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 19, 2005, 03:29:34 PM »
Aye
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,712
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 19, 2005, 04:26:37 PM »
Aye
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 19, 2005, 05:01:06 PM »
Nay
Logged
Q
QQQQQQ
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,319


Political Matrix
E: 2.26, S: -4.88

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 19, 2005, 05:10:53 PM »
« Edited: October 19, 2005, 05:36:23 PM by Q »
Maybe I'm missing something, but won't this increase Atlasia's flammability a great deal?

Nay unless I am convinced otherwise.
Logged
jokerman
Cosmo Kramer
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,808
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 19, 2005, 05:14:34 PM »
Quote from: Q on October 19, 2005, 05:10:53 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but won't this increase Atlasia's flammibility a great deal?
Indeed.

This bans forms of asbestos that are completely harmless.

Why is the Senate banning things that are completely harmless, and are important insulators used in the fire-fighting industry?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,712
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 20, 2005, 02:49:03 AM »
No form of asbestos is harmless; even "safe" white asbestos kills thousands every year. Unless you want to believe studies funded by the Canadian asbestos mining industry.

There are other fire retardents out there and from what I'm aware (and I could be wrong) the fire-fighting industry often uses these anyway.
Logged
Gabu
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,386
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 20, 2005, 03:38:55 PM »
Abstain.
Logged
Q
QQQQQQ
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,319


Political Matrix
E: 2.26, S: -4.88

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 20, 2005, 03:47:55 PM »
Quote from: Senator Al on October 20, 2005, 02:49:03 AM
No form of asbestos is harmless; even "safe" white asbestos kills thousands every year. Unless you want to believe studies funded by the Canadian asbestos mining industry.

There are other fire retardents out there and from what I'm aware (and I could be wrong) the fire-fighting industry often uses these anyway.

I recognize that asbestos can be dangerous, but it seems to me that its benefits outweigh its dangers.

Few people die from asbestos poisoning in comparison to the number of people who might have died in tinderbox-like buildings without fireproofing.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,712
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 20, 2005, 04:19:52 PM »
Quote from: Q on October 20, 2005, 03:47:55 PM
I recognize that asbestos can be dangerous, but it seems to me that its benefits outweigh its dangers.

Quite a hard case to make bearing in mind that close to 10,000 people die every year as a direct result of asbestos and the fact that there are other materials than can be used as a fire-retardent.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If that's a concern of yours, maybe try tightening up building regulations? That would save even more lives.
Logged
Q
QQQQQQ
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,319


Political Matrix
E: 2.26, S: -4.88

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 20, 2005, 04:37:44 PM »
Quote from: Senator Al on October 20, 2005, 04:19:52 PM
Quote from: Q on October 20, 2005, 03:47:55 PM
I recognize that asbestos can be dangerous, but it seems to me that its benefits outweigh its dangers.
Quite a hard case to make bearing in mind that close to 10,000 people die every year as a direct result of asbestos and the fact that there are other materials than can be used as a fire-retardent.

If indeed there are.  You seemed unsure earlier, and I know little about the subject myself.  If safer materials can be easily substituted, then I will reconsider my position.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
If that's a concern of yours, maybe try tightening up building regulations? That would save even more lives.
[/quote]

You are very right, Senator.  Preventing deaths in burning buildings is indeed a concern of mine.


Again, I'm asking (and willing) to be convinced here, Senator.  I'm open to your reasoning.
Logged
Defarge
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,588


Political Matrix
E: -3.13, S: -0.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 20, 2005, 06:32:03 PM »
Aye.  I'm pretty sure there are other fire retardents.
Logged
Gabu
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,386
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 20, 2005, 06:54:15 PM »
I'll change my vote to aye if someone can show me what these retardants are, as I really know next to nothing about asbestos and its alternatives.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 11 queries.