what is wrong with issus 221

[Luna Amore]

My nation's economy tanked several months ago - and even after multiple issues that ought to have at least had SOME effect, still zero. So basically, I've taken a 'screw it' approach, all the work I put into this game is for naught. I might as well just see how screwy I can make this nation.

You are actually close to being out of the hole. Huzzah for the screw it approach.

[Evilcia]

On even more of what is wrong here.

I don,t know how long I have waited since I post,

But here, you can see, that Fauzjha is still at o, even with 60 on business... while evilcia have 240 and I have reached the maximum recently. and seeing how my economy varies little over time, I doubt this frightning economy is going to fall.

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=fau ... tail=trend

S, big question, is it possible to help Fauzjhia recover its economy.

[Drachmaland]

Latest changes to Issue #221: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88&p=26811063#p26811063

[Jute]

So I got this issue again and hoped it'd, like it says, destroy my tax rate by abolishing. Instead I got a meager 1 % reduce from 98.9 to 97.9 % or so. I thought only the third option was changed, and the people who didn't like the effects of option 1 could choose to roll back with the immediate issue (which I didn't even get) ?

[Trotterdam]

You'll just have to slowly whittle away your taxes over the course of many issues... exactly the same advice the rest of us used to get for rebuilding our economy after this issue destroyed it.

[Jute]

You'll just have to slowly whittle away your taxes over the course of many issues... exactly the same advice the rest of us used to get for rebuilding our economy after this issue destroyed it.

But it used to be different, and there are much less opportunities to lower taxes than to build up an economy, it seems, especially after such a long time.

[Sedgistan]

You'll just have to slowly whittle away your taxes over the course of many issues... exactly the same advice the rest of us used to get for rebuilding our economy after this issue destroyed it.

But it used to be different, and there are much less opportunities to lower taxes than to build up an economy, it seems, especially after such a long time.

We're aware of that, and are looking to address it. The primary problem this issue had was confusing two matters - overcomplicated tax codes, and high levels of government spending. It's been re-written to focus on the former. Expect to see something soon that addresses the latter.

[Trotterdam]

I think something like a 10%-20% tax drop may be a decent compromise to allow nations who want to cut their taxes to do so faster than a snail's pace, without immediately crashing nations that were entirely dependant on tax money.

[Jute]

I think something like a 10%-20% tax drop may be a decent compromise to allow nations who want to cut their taxes to do so faster than a snail's pace, without immediately crashing nations that were entirely dependant on tax money.

I liked the option of crashing it and then being able to reinstate a fraction instantly with a follow-up issue.

But it used to be different, and there are much less opportunities to lower taxes than to build up an economy, it seems, especially after such a long time.

We're aware of that, and are looking to address it. The primary problem this issue had was confusing two matters - overcomplicated tax codes, and high levels of government spending. It's been re-written to focus on the former. Expect to see something soon that addresses the latter.

Thanks!

[Undivulged Principles]

Its not about crashing the economy but continually punishing business subsidation when there is no reason to do so.

The issue has too much of a far reaching effect. It is sort of a leech that always springs up when government expenditures increase. Every time government increases it causes a detriment to business. That just isn't realistic.

[Trotterdam]

The issue has too much of a far reaching effect. It is sort of a leech that always springs up when government expenditures increase. Every time government increases it causes a detriment to business. That just isn't realistic.

No, the game is the other way around. Cutting taxes is almost always bad for business.

[Undivulged Principles]

The issue has too much of a far reaching effect. It is sort of a leech that always springs up when government expenditures increase. Every time government increases it causes a detriment to business. That just isn't realistic.

No, the game is the other way around. Cutting taxes is almost always bad for business.

Don't quit your day job.

With answers like that you might want to refrain from offering issue advice, at least where it pertains to business.

[Trotterdam]

With answers like that you might want to refrain from offering issue advice, at least where it pertains to business.

Shh, it's okay. I've long since accepted that your opinions on issues aren't worth listening to.

[Luna Amore]

Undivulged and Trott, please stop sniping each other.

[Undivulged Principles]

Undivulged and Trott, please stop sniping each other.

There is no sniping on my part.

Anyone who States that cutting taxes almost always hurts business in this game clearly has no clue what they are talking about in reference to business. Besides his stats support my conclusion.

My analysis clearly supports my conclusions and I have listed very explicitly how and why it has done so over a period of months.

Can he say the same? His economy is nothing to speak of for his size so his views in reference to business are inherently suspect. His industry is extremely localized so his general views about how issues affect business are not warranted. The very fact that most of the extremely dynamic economies in the fame have no tax rate clearly indicate his previous statement is contradictory

[Undivulged Principles]

There is no snipe. It is calling out a stupid statement that has no bearing on the conditions of this particular issue, and in general to all the issues pertaining to business.

He is wrong. It is simple as that.

If you wish to allow people to give false advise on issues that is your prerogative. I will be more than happy to state otherwise. And the facts and stats clearly support me.

[Luna Amore]

There's a better way to say it is all I'm saying.

Personally, I don't care if wrong info about stats gets shared, because, barring specific instances, staff isn't going to confirm exact stat changes/overall stat behavior. People get stats wrong all the time here. I ignore it and move on. As a player you are free to speculate, but I'm just suggesting you both temper your snark/bluntness. That's all.

[Trotterdam]

His economy is nothing to speak of for his size so his views in reference to business are inherently suspect. His industry is extremely localized so his general views about how issues affect business are not warranted.

Excuse me!?

My Economy stat is in the top 1% of the world (and #1 in the region, though you can't see it because we're not large enough to grant #1 trophies right now). Not that that means much, since all economies at 100 are treated as tied and I just won the tiebreaker, but then my economy is at 100.

I'm also in to top 1% of the world for 2 industries (Information Technology, Tourism), in the top 5% for 3 more industries (Cheese Exports, Book Publishing, Furniture Restoration), and in the top 10% for 2 more (Timber Woodchipping, Agricultural Sector).

That my economy isn't better is because of environment and consumer protection laws, not because of the tax rate.

A tax rate, I'll note, of 98.6%, only 13.2% of which gets spent on business subsidization. If taxes were bad for the economy, my economy should be totally ruined, not just slightly sluggish.

By comparison, the first nation I could think of with no taxes is Seaponies, which also has a Pro-Market of 80. Their economy is terrible compared to mine. It's true that their very richest earn about twice what my average citizens do, but their poorest earn 25 times less.

The single most awful economy I've ever come across is Lazy Faerie (Pro-Market is 40, not high but also not low, and the fact it's positive means private enterprise is legal), which looks like this:

The imploded fae economy, worth 86.0 billion pittances a year, defies classification, with the entire state effectively one black market. Average income is 5 pittances, and evenly distributed, with the richest citizens earning only 2.2 times as much as the poorest.

Crime, especially youth-related, is so common that it is unusual to encounter someone following the law, perhaps because of the country's complete lack of prisons.

Income tax is unheard of.

Of course, pointing at a few examples proves little, given how many other variables there are.

I happened to test cutting taxes on one nation just now, via #443 option 3 ("The market is smarter than a bunch of bureaucrats, so we should cut all subsidies propping up enterprises that don't turn a real profit."). The effects were:

The medium-sized, pro-business government juggles the competing demands of Defense, Law & Order, and Industry. Citizens pay a flat income tax of 23.3%.

Average income is 63,402 @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, but there is a large disparity between incomes, with the richest 10% of citizens earning 248,049 per year while the poor average 11,040, a ratio of 22.5 to 1.

The medium-sized, pro-business government juggles the competing demands of Defense, Law & Order, and Social Policy. Citizens pay a flat income tax of 15.5%.

Average income is 51,788 @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, but there is a large disparity between incomes, with the richest 10% of citizens earning 226,446 per year while the poor average 7,471, a ratio of 30.3 to 1.

Relevant stat effects were spectacular:
-25 Economy (92 -> 67)
-18 Business Subsidization (21 -> 3)
+6 Pro-Market (81 -> 87)
-46 Employment (91 -> 45)
(No change to any of the individual industry scores, which tend to be highly unresponsive.)

This was specifically subsidization rather than a generic all-around tax cut, but those have much the same effect.

There's more than one route to a good economy in NationStates, but having high taxes is by far the easiest and least harmful.

He is wrong. It is simple as that.

You are wrong. It is as simple as that.

[Aculea]

Looking at the first 200 decisions of a new nation:
25 raised economy:
13 lowered taxes, 10 raised them
22 raised median income, 2 lowered it
5 showed one or more drops in government, 4 of which were global
15 showed one or more raises in government, 3 of which were global

I do not consider industry statistics reliable, but there were 20 visible increases in this or that industry and 8 visible decreases.

16 lowered economy:
6 lowered taxes, 9 raised them
None raised median income, 13 lowered it.
6 showed one or more drops in government, 2 of which were global
5 showed one or more raises in government, 2 of which were global

There were 2 visible increases in this or that industry and 16 visible decreases.

Not all numbers sum to 25 or 16 because of decisions that do not change one way or another.

There was one decision described as a tax cut: the government has cut taxes in the face of widespread tax evasion.
No change to the economy score, taxes down 2.8%, median income down 1189, global cut in government, no visible changes to industry.

Looking at tax cuts in other nations, for which I have no record of median income:

government officials frequently cut taxes as a distraction from antics with their secretaries.
Economy down one, taxes the same, welfare and subsidization down one each

citizens are enjoying a recent large cut in taxes.
Economy the same, tax rate down 2%, global cut in government by 3 points, no changes in industry

thousands of former welfare recipients are in a revolutionary uproar as the rest of society is enjoying a hefty tax break.
Economy the same, tax rate down 14.5%, global cut in government by 4 points, except welfare set to 0. Cheese industry down one.

[Undivulged Principles]

A Breakdown of Trotterdam's Economy

9 industries are positive (5 of these are equivalent to a nation of 100 million population or less with a strong economy)
9 industries are negative (5 of which are among the lowest 5% in the world)

Compared with nations around 8 billion in population the stats listed above, only two are in comparison to the strongest economies (one of these is tourism, a notorious stat for weak economies). The biggest stat is IT, which is nice but is also a hallmark of many specialized industrialized nations.

All manufacturing stats are very low, especially in comparison to nations of equitable population.

The game itself states Trotterdam's economy is specialized. A nation with any economy to speak of will eventually reach frightening status. Take a look at his trend. It took him almost 4 billion population to reach 100 economy. That is not close to impressive, especially when you consider you can reach frightening before 100 million and 100 economy by 300 million. The best economies around his size are ranked in or around the top 100 in the world in economic growth. Trotterdam's barely makes the top 1%. The most dynamic economies around his population also rank in the top 1%, if not the top 500 in at least 8 industry stats, trotterdam does not come close. A strong economy, yes, dynamic and well rounded, certainly not.

For the record it isn't a "tie breaker" that determines the stats for economic growth. The Top 30 has rarely changed over the last 10 years on that particular census report. This indicates something other than a tie breaker.

You can reach the Top 5% in any category in this game within the first six months of a nation's existence very easily. I have proven this fact a dozen times with over a dozen nations and this has been duplicated countless times by many other nations. A nation in the top 5% in any economic stat with a population of 8 billion is very far from impressive.

To use the last two census reports as a rough basis the best economic nations of approximately the same size should be ranked around Top 100 in the world in basket weaving and Top 150 in the world for auto manufacturing. These are good reports since many weak economies can have decent basket weaving while few dynamic economies have low auto ranking (Trotterdam's qualifies as an infant nation's basket weaving (4) and incredibly low auto (-14). Not dynamic at all).

If he doesn't understand or accept these basic facts then his opinions don't hold much merit by any standard.

If nations that ban automobiles can hover around the top 1% in auto manufacturing, with an equitable population, a person should not state their economy is either dynamic or well rounded. It isn't. They might believe it but the stats don't justify their opinion.

Don't use environment as some sort of crux. You can easily attain a premium economy with an equally premium environment. Trotterdam has neither. Both their economy and environment are mediocre for their size. I will not use my nation as an example for I will hear the response that my stats are slanted for one reason or another. There are hundreds of other examples that can be found. Go find them.

Don't cherry pick from nations that happen to fit the criteria you wish to highlight. Look at a greater sample and you will see how far from the top your nation really is. It is also irrelevant to look at a small sample of low population nations to try and garner a trend of how economic rankings will run. It doesn't work that way.

Now let us get off this silly little tangent and address the issue at hand. There is nothing wrong with dropping an economy to zero with option 3 for this issue. There is a problem with continually punishing a nations business subsidation over years for one particular issue response. Temporarily yes. Permanently no.

[Undivulged Principles]

There's a better way to say it is all I'm saying.

Personally, I don't care if wrong info about stats gets shared, because, barring specific instances, staff isn't going to confirm exact stat changes/overall stat behavior. People get stats wrong all the time here. I ignore it and move on. As a player you are free to speculate, but I'm just suggesting you both temper your snark/bluntness. That's all.

Personally I don't care how people talk about me or anything I may stand for i this game or reality. Give it to me. I can take it.

What I don't like is hypocrites that allow trolling in a game and then try to regulate freedom of speech.

Raid all you like but how dare you criticize someone in a manner that doesn't suit some moderators idea of etiquette.

Give me a break.

[Trotterdam]

thousands of former welfare recipients are in a revolutionary uproar as the rest of society is enjoying a hefty tax break.
Economy the same, tax rate down 14.5%, global cut in government by 4 points, except welfare set to 0. Cheese industry down one.

This is pretty informative. An option specifically about cutting benefits to the poorest segment of the population in the name of helping the rich, and it still visibly cuts economy, even if only slightly. (Other industries were probably also harmed, but Cheese Exports was the only one close enough to a breakpoint at the time to change visibly.)

I observe that all of your explicit examples show tax cuts, at best, merely not measurably hurting the economy, but never show them actually helping the economy.

For the record it isn't a "tie breaker" that determines the stats for economic growth. The Top 30 has rarely changed over the last 10 years on that particular census report. This indicates something other than a tie breaker.

I believe the tiebreaker is based on the order nations are stored in the database. So older nations have an advantage, and so long as they don't move regions (which shuffles around their database), they'll probably keep their spot.

[Eaischpnaeieacgkque Bhcieaghpodsttditf]

Okay, Trott and Undivulged I am saying this as a fellow gamer and witness to many arguments. I think that the best thing to do with this hostile discussion is to drop it. I may be viewing your conversations back and forth differently than others, but it sounds a little hostile to me.

[Ratateague]

I believe the tiebreaker is based on the order nations are stored in the database. So older nations have an advantage, and so long as they don't move regions (which shuffles around their database), they'll probably keep their spot.

I'm gonna second you on that. I've also noticed leading nations in capped stats retain their spots despite not answering issues and being inactive. With the exception of Economy, which actually dips below and rises beyond the 0-100 scope, Civil and Political Rights, Income Equality, Wealth Gaps, Ideological Radicality, Social Conservatism, and Recreational Drug Use have all remained relatively stagnant at both ends, with some using the spot as advertising space. HDI is soon reaching that status as well.

I also noticed, in rare cases, that the "most endorsements in the region" badge is sometimes not given to a newer delegate upon the stat update. This happened to me, and it didn't switch over until the very moment I endorsed somebody. That was likely a glitch, though.

[Undivulged Principles]

There is no cap. I have passed two nations in my region alone in economy stat over the past few years. The stats are not stagnant. You would know this if you really took the time to look. It is easy to blame others or the game for things you cannot surmount. It is much harder to look inward to find fault.

My brother's nation Economic Invincibility has been passing ancient nations left and right in economic stat and is currently in Top 100.

Invidentally that nation is slightly smaller than Trotterdam.

I would appreciate if the moderators wouldn't try and slant my objective analysis. If a nation is going to state something about himself that isn't true I will call them out on it.

The game itself describes his nation as specialized. I merely pointed out how this assessment is true. If you feel there is a bias there perhaps you should look into the game mechanics and not try to pin some bias onto me. I am observing. I do this all the time. If it is painful to a nation to hear their nation isn't as great as they believe, I don't really care. That is not my fault. The game itself is saying it, not me.

Once again, if you want to discuss this in more detail make a topic about it. I will be more than happy to go into more detail in my own time. I happen to have just moved across the world so my time is currently limited. But please leave this topic to its original intent and stop hijacking it.