Ridiculous NS Economic Calculation

[Edo Edi Essum]

Nonetheless, my economy shrank. Actually, shrank is an understatement. It fell six categories, from Good to Fragile. (Good-Reasonable-Fair-Developing-Struggling-Weak-Fragile)

By the way, the above is not the correct order. You fell five categories, not six. Also, in the backup I have, which was a few days before, your economy was "Reasonable," not "Good," so I would guess you had only just qualified for the latter.

Oh, I had just qualified. That doesn't mean I don't want it back.

NS thought I was capitalist. Weird. Still, six categories is a lot.

I know I'm probably the 20,000th person to mention this, but you really need to correct the logistics of a capitalist economy with a 100% income tax. Your loophole qualifies only under the most bizarre of circumstances.

Thanks for fixing the code. I'm glad my complaint was accepted.

[[violet]]

It is tempting to redo the tax calculation, because I agree, far too many nations have 100% tax rates. It would disrupt quite a few players who rely on the current system, though.

[Edo Edi Essum]

It is tempting to redo the tax calculation, because I agree, far too many nations have 100% tax rates. It would disrupt quite a few players who rely on the current system, though.

How would you redo the tax calculation, were you to disregard others' opinions? I am curious.

[Reploid Productions]

Well, one way we could try to counteract the fact many issue options will raise taxes is to do some more new issues that take an axe to spending; that just requires writing in new issues, not overhauling the game code.

[[violet]]

Yep. If I were to change the code, though, I'd probably stretch the range, so it becomes exponentially more difficult to reach 100% tax. We might have plenty of nations on 80 or 90% tax rates, then, but only really committed communists on 100%.

[Edo Edi Essum]

Yep. If I were to change the code, though, I'd probably stretch the range, so it becomes exponentially more difficult to reach 100% tax. We might have plenty of nations on 80 or 90% tax rates, then, but only really committed communists on 100%.

That's a good system. It should be instituted.

[Maurdohpia (Ancient)]

Yep. If I were to change the code, though, I'd probably stretch the range, so it becomes exponentially more difficult to reach 100% tax. We might have plenty of nations on 80 or 90% tax rates, then, but only really committed communists on 100%.

That is an excellent idea. Some legislations, like allowing sex changes on government cost, increase the income tax by way too much (3% for me, there's no way 108 million people have to pay 3% of what they pay for the few people that undergo such operations).

[Ballotonia]

That is an excellent idea. Some legislations, like allowing sex changes on government cost, increase the income tax by way too much (3% for me, there's no way 108 million people have to pay 3% of what they pay for the few people that undergo such operations).

Population has nothing to do with that, since doubling ones population should lead to a doubling of such cases. Also to factor in is the price of such operations in your specific country related to the average income of your citizens.

Ballotonia

[Maurdohpia (Ancient)]

That is an excellent idea. Some legislations, like allowing sex changes on government cost, increase the income tax by way too much (3% for me, there's no way 108 million people have to pay 3% of what they pay for the few people that undergo such operations).

Population has nothing to do with that, since doubling ones population should lead to a doubling of such cases. Also to factor in is the price of such operations in your specific country related to the average income of your citizens.

Ballotonia

I know, but I was just using it to get my point across. I'm not sure what your second part means.

[Ballotonia]

Population has nothing to do with that, since doubling ones population should lead to a doubling of such cases. Also to factor in is the price of such operations in your specific country related to the average income of your citizens.

Ballotonia

I know, but I was just using it to get my point across. I'm not sure what your second part means.

The second part: if the price of a single operation is high, and the income of your average citizen is low, it would take a higher percentage of the average citizen's income to collectively pay for that operation. Similarly if it's a cheap procedure in your nation and the average citizen has a comparatively high income, it would require only a very small tax hike to pay for all operations.

Ballotonia

[Edo Edi Essum]

I know, but I was just using it to get my point across. I'm not sure what your second part means.

The second part: if the price of a single operation is high, and the income of your average citizen is low, it would take a higher percentage of the average citizen's income to collectively pay for that operation. Similarly if it's a cheap procedure in your nation and the average citizen has a comparatively high income, it would require only a very small tax hike to pay for all operations.

Ballotonia

Maurdophia's economy is quite strong.

[NewTexas]

Yep. If I were to change the code, though, I'd probably stretch the range, so it becomes exponentially more difficult to reach 100% tax. We might have plenty of nations on 80 or 90% tax rates, then, but only really committed communists on 100%.

FYI: The current Tax Distribution:

Rate Count Percentage of Total 
0    6419  10.66% 
1    395   0.66% 
2    360   0.60% 
3    409   0.68% 
4    378   0.63% 
5    419   0.70% 
6    411   0.68% 
7    485   0.81% 
8    496   0.82% 
9    535   0.89% 
10   540   0.90% 
11   521   0.86% 
12   559   0.93% 
13   944   1.57% 
14   608   1.01% 
15   581   0.96% 
16   707   1.17% 
17   687   1.14% 
18   795   1.32% 
19   831   1.38% 
20   773   1.28% 
21   750   1.25% 
22   727   1.21% 
23   758   1.26% 
24   707   1.17% 
25   708   1.18% 
26   702   1.17% 
27   775   1.29% 
28   775   1.29% 
29   733   1.22% 
30   773   1.28% 
31   772   1.28% 
32   892   1.48% 
33   778   1.29% 
34   696   1.16% 
35   717   1.19% 
36   657   1.09% 
37   700   1.16% 
38   667   1.11% 
39   647   1.07% 
40   642   1.07% 
41   636   1.06% 
42   610   1.01% 
43   516   0.86% 
44   556   0.92% 
45   553   0.92% 
46   494   0.82% 
47   544   0.90% 
48   619   1.03% 
49   519   0.86% 
50   474   0.79% 
51   465   0.77% 
52   396   0.66% 
53   494   0.82% 
54   464   0.77% 
55   402   0.67% 
56   385   0.64% 
57   382   0.63% 
58   374   0.62% 
59   373   0.62% 
60   345   0.57% 
61   309   0.51% 
62   350   0.58% 
63   322   0.53% 
64   304   0.50% 
65   293   0.49% 
66   287   0.48% 
67   341   0.57% 
68   309   0.51% 
69   339   0.56% 
70   335   0.56% 
71   281   0.47% 
72   270   0.45% 
73   261   0.43% 
74   258   0.43% 
75   257   0.43% 
76   216   0.36% 
77   234   0.39% 
78   241   0.40% 
79   256   0.43% 
80   224   0.37% 
81   230   0.38% 
82   203   0.34% 
83   206   0.34% 
84   202   0.34% 
85   197   0.33% 
86   199   0.33% 
87   193   0.32% 
88   200   0.33% 
89   193   0.32% 
90   193   0.32% 
91   162   0.27% 
92   201   0.33% 
93   173   0.29% 
94   178   0.30% 
95   139   0.23% 
96   155   0.26% 
97   167   0.28% 
98   152   0.25% 
99   147   0.24% 
100  9025  14.98%

[Edo Edi Essum]

OK, I am confused again. To prevent corruption, I mandated that government officials publicly record any donations. My economy strength fell from Struggling to Basket Case.

When I'm passing every law I can to bolster my economy (selling weapons to anyone [151-2] or annexing other nations' resources), my economy doesn't budge. But when I pass a law irrelevant to economic strength, my economy dies.

I am increasingly believing NS's economic calculation is entirely arbitrary.

[Glen-Rhodes]

OK, I am confused again. To prevent corruption, I mandated that government officials publicly record any donations. My economy strength fell from Struggling to Basket Case.

Do you remember the issue title or number?

I am increasingly believing NS's economic calculation is entirely arbitrary.

It has to be arbitrary, since there isn't any actual kind of functioning economy on NationStates. You also have to remember that issue effects are purposefully extreme. I'm not sure what issue you got, but it's very likely that economic strength was tenuously connected. Only an admin could tell, but you could have actually experienced a small economic effect that just brought you over the border into a Basket Case economy.

[Romanar]

Yep. If I were to change the code, though, I'd probably stretch the range, so it becomes exponentially more difficult to reach 100% tax. We might have plenty of nations on 80 or 90% tax rates, then, but only really committed communists on 100%.

That sounds good to me. Romanar's not supposed to be communist, but I have 100% tax, probably from spending money like a drunken American Congressman.

[Ledarre]

OK, I am confused again. To prevent corruption, I mandated that government officials publicly record any donations. My economy strength fell from Struggling to Basket Case.

When I'm passing every law I can to bolster my economy (selling weapons to anyone [151-2] or annexing other nations' resources), my economy doesn't budge. But when I pass a law irrelevant to economic strength, my economy dies.

I am increasingly believing NS's economic calculation is entirely arbitrary.

I suspect the issue your referring to is "@@Name@@'s government saturated in corruption" or something. The reason, I think why your economy went down, is that your government has put in perhaps certain officials such as judges independent of legislative bodies to decide whether government servants are acting in an illegal fashion. These judges are paid for in taxes, which will take money out of the economy. As for the point about annexing other nations, annexation is probably fairly expensive and over time you colonies will become more expensive to keep as resources become depleted.

I also suspect it has something to do with the fact that you are a relitively new nation, issues effect smaller nation more than bigger nation.

Hope this helps.

Also I agree that the tax coding should be changed.

[[violet]]

I've thrown up a new calculator; lemme know what you think.

[Edo Edi Essum]

OK, I am confused again. To prevent corruption, I mandated that government officials publicly record any donations. My economy strength fell from Struggling to Basket Case.

When I'm passing every law I can to bolster my economy (selling weapons to anyone [151-2] or annexing other nations' resources), my economy doesn't budge. But when I pass a law irrelevant to economic strength, my economy dies.

I am increasingly believing NS's economic calculation is entirely arbitrary.

Violet, since my economy fell seven categories somewhat arbitrarily, which is exceedingly catastrophic, could you augment my economy? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Also, why are we not allowed to telegram Violet?

[The Most Glorious Hack]

Also, why are we not allowed to telegram Violet?

Because [violet] is a forum-only account. There's no nation to telegram.

[Quailtopia]

But I'd disagree with that, bearing in mind we are not talking about a relatively moderate socialist-capitalist hybrid economy, but the extreme one in which nobody owns any property of any kind.

*scratches head* That isn't in line with Marxist doctrine though... Seems like the effect wasn't well researched.

[Edo Edi Essum]

But I'd disagree with that, bearing in mind we are not talking about a relatively moderate socialist-capitalist hybrid economy, but the extreme one in which nobody owns any property of any kind.

*scratches head* That isn't in line with Marxist doctrine though... Seems like the effect wasn't well researched.

What do you mean, Quailtopia?

[Violet, please reply.]

[Quailtopia]

*scratches head* That isn't in line with Marxist doctrine though... Seems like the effect wasn't well researched.

What do you mean, Quailtopia?

[Violet, please reply.]

Marxists don't believe in taking every article of private property away from you. Well, Marxist-Leninists don't, anyway. Private property is usually defined as productive property, such as factories and printing presses.

Also, they aren't going to modify your econ score

[Edo Edi Essum]

What do you mean, Quailtopia?

[Violet, please reply.]

Marxists don't believe in taking every article of private property away from you. Well, Marxist-Leninists don't, anyway. Private property is usually defined as productive property, such as factories and printing presses.

Also, they aren't going to modify your econ score

Agreed

[[violet]]

EEE, if you want me to take a look at the effect of a particular option of a particular issue, give me some details. You're saying you lost seven economic categories because of a public record of donations issue; I had to guess you were referring to "Corporations Demand Political Say." I still can't figure out which option you mean.

[Edo Edi Essum]

EEE, if you want me to take a look at the effect of a particular option of a particular issue, give me some details. You're saying you lost seven economic categories because of a public record of donations issue; I had to guess you were referring to "Corporations Demand Political Say." I still can't figure out which option you mean.

229, Option 2
I apologize for my delayed reply.

2. "The problem is transparency," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, member of the National Whistleblower Association. "They can do whatever they want because they have absolutely no obligation to provide the public with the details of what they're doing. We should make all the details of any gifts or money available to the public, and make politicians accountable to the law."