Dingbats wrote:However, regarding 492.1, there was only a 0.07% rise in tourism (which was expected, if underwhelming), yet saw drops of 0.13% in six industries and public education to, by your logic, facilitate that growth. Now, it's hard to compare tourists per hour to the value in currency of say book publishing (if separate rankings are even comparable at all? I don't know), but it seems a bit much. My tourism sector is probably so big it's difficult to grow it even further, I get that, however it seems to be at a point where, generally speaking, the actual effects of an issue are dwarfed by the so-called side effects.
You will never see a situation where the sum of the "quirk" side-effects are more substantial than the main effect (or even very close to it), since they're proportional to it.
The reason for this effect in Dingbats is that the Tourism ranking is a bit different. It probably shouldn't, but at the moment Tourism does not directly measure the industry's economic output, unlike Book Publishing, Arms Manufacturing, etc, but instead measures a combination of industry size and attractiveness to foreign tourists. So it's possible for the tourism industry's economic output to go up while "Tourists Per Hour" goes down, and vice versa. Which, granted, is not very intuitive.
When Dingbats passed 492.1, its tourism industry did grow in economic terms, and by substantially more than anything else shrunk, with Economic Output up 0.13% in total, but Tourists Per Hour was crimped by some decreased friendliness/compassion.
That is normally the kind of thing that's embedded into the calculation of industry size, and we should probably do that for Tourism, too.
