[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects Since New Update

[Luna Amore]

PLEASE PROVIDE THE NATION THAT ANSWERED THE ISSUE, THE ISSUE NUMBER AND THE CHOICE SELECTED
IF THE CHANGE IS PROPORTIONALLY NEGLIGIBLE, DO NOT REPORT IT. PERCENTAGE IS NOT ALWAYS THE BEST INDICATOR; LOOK AT THE RAW NUMBERS ON THE TREND.

I've been running into a few of these since the update and it showing us the effects, I realize with such a large update that some of these will happen but I didn't see a thread about them. I'm not just talking about the seemingly random lesser effects some have I'm talking about effects that go against what the stated effect was.

Leaving the internet providers to run themselves in Broadband going to the birds raises taxes +0.22% and lowers freedom from taxation -0.15%

When the effect of "hearkening unto god" to stop the drought on another issue says tourists flock to the nation to see the famous raindances it actually lowers tourism.

And I know I've run into more they just escape me at the moment.

[Ratateague]

Personally, I've encountered issue #017 (Corporations Demand Political Say), and choosing option 2 raises corruption. I can understand if regulation may be viewed as authoritarian in some way, but that is not necessarily synonymous with a green handshake. Especially, since the implication of raised corruption in response to option 2 is that the party would be securing it's power (assuming there is a party), but that's what option 3 already explicitly outlines.

Corruption:
1. dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.
(wikipedia) a form of dishonest or unethical conduct by a person entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire personal benefit.

If option 1 and option 3 more than reasonably qualify for those definitions, then why should the one that reduces the possibility of bribery and personal benefit ("Money should have no place in politics!") be the one that raises corruption?

When the effect of "hearkening unto god" to stop the drought on another issue says tourists flock to the nation to see the famous raindances it actually lowers tourism.

You're not alone, I also encountered that.

[Luna Amore]

I suspect we're going to have more of these reports now that issues are a bit more open. It is essential that you provide the nation that picked the option.

Leaving the internet providers to run themselves in Broadband going to the birds raises taxes +0.22% and lowers freedom from taxation -0.15

I am seeing that and it does seem paradoxical. I'll look further into it.

When the effect of "hearkening unto god" to stop the drought on another issue says tourists flock to the nation to see the famous raindances it actually lowers tourism.

Little bit of an odd one. Fixed.

Personally, I've encountered issue #017 (Corporations Demand Political Say), and choosing option 2 raises corruption. I can understand if regulation may be viewed as authoritarian in some way, but that is not necessarily synonymous with a green handshake. Especially, since the implication of raised corruption in response to option 2 is that the party would be securing it's power (assuming there is a party), but that's what option 3 already explicitly outlines.

Not seeing that on the backend. Which nation and was it fairly recent?

[Ratateague]

Not seeing that on the backend. Which nation and was it fairly recent?

This one. Not too recent, no, but since the change.

[Drawkland]

Answered #089, ("Don't Dam Our Rivers, Dammit") with option 2. The last sentence of this option says "Plus, think of how much the economy would benefit from all the jobs these projects would create."

I chose this option, and my employment decreased, despite this option basically promising to raise employment.

Answered on this nation earlier today I believe, and the decrease was by 0.56% if I recall correctly (but that seems to be the only change I get from issues anymore, minute ones).

[Luna Amore]

Not seeing that on the backend. Which nation and was it fairly recent?

This one. Not too recent, no, but since the change.

Still not seeing it. Your nation is already so unbelievably incorruptible that changes are going to be hard to come by for you in that stat period.

Neither of your Corruption or Compliance graphs show a change at all. If there was a change, it would have had to be extremely minute and due to how on the fringe you are corruption-wise.

[Ratateague]

This one. Not too recent, no, but since the change.

Still not seeing it. Your nation is already so unbelievably incorruptible that changes are going to be hard to come by for you in that stat period.

Neither of your Corruption or Compliance graphs show a change at all. If there was a change, it would have had to be extremely minute and due to how on the fringe you are corruption-wise.

I'll try and see if I can recreate the effect using the help of some puppets. I haven't come across that one yet, but... Kennakerling recently answered the Derailing The Gravy Train issue, and chose option 1. Corruption increased. Maybe that was intended, though.

[Leppikania]

In Pyrocynical, making smoking legal decreased recreational drug use. By a lot. This makes even less sense with the effect line:

Following new legislation in Pyrocynical, 8 year olds can be seen lighting up in public areas.

[Luna Amore]

In Pyrocynical, making smoking legal decreased recreational drug use. By a lot. This makes even less sense with the effect line:

Following new legislation in Pyrocynical, 8 year olds can be seen lighting up in public areas.

In nations where drug use is mandatory, that will happen.

[Mushet]

With this nation on Budget Time: Accountants Excited focusing more funding on military and police raises law enforcement but also raises crime. I did that to lower my sky high crime rate and it seems paradoxical

[Mushet]

My puppet Teshum chose the same issue and it didn't raise the crime rate, weird.

But when I chose to expand the freeway system with that nation instead of public transport public transport was raised +11.9%.

[Luna Amore]

My puppet Teshum chose the same issue and it didn't raise the crime rate, weird.

But when I chose to expand the freeway system with that nation instead of public transport public transport was raised +11.9%.

Different strokes for different folks nations.

Can't respond to the second one without an issue number.

[Mushet]

My puppet Teshum chose the same issue and it didn't raise the crime rate, weird.

But when I chose to expand the freeway system with that nation instead of public transport public transport was raised +11.9%.

Different strokes for different folks nations.

Can't respond to the second one without an issue number.

Road Rage Rampage, I believe it's #100

[Skappola]

I just had an issue called the "Long and Winding halls of %[CAPITAL]%." I chose option two, which involved gutting government spending. This resulted in every one of my industries increasing substantially, but the employment, economy, and economic output all fell. My economy fell from a 100 to a 98! It's completely nonsensical! Why would cutting taxes in half cause my economy to drop but all of my industries to skyrocket?

[Luna Amore]

I just had an issue called the "Long and Winding halls of %[CAPITAL]%." I chose option two, which involved gutting government spending. This resulted in every one of my industries increasing substantially, but the employment, economy, and economic output all fell. My economy fell from a 100 to a 98! It's completely nonsensical! Why would cutting taxes in half cause my economy to drop but all of my industries to skyrocket?

The industry bumps are a quirk (not a bug) of the new system. There was a potential correction in the works in beta, but it ended up causing more problems than it solved.

The drop in the economy is pretty understandable. You gutted your government.

[Ratateague]

I just had an issue called the "Long and Winding halls of %[CAPITAL]%." I chose option two, which involved gutting government spending. This resulted in every one of my industries increasing substantially, but the employment, economy, and economic output all fell. My economy fell from a 100 to a 98! It's completely nonsensical! Why would cutting taxes in half cause my economy to drop but all of my industries to skyrocket?

It's a bit complicated, but government provides secure employment, as well as opportunities to the private sector in the form of contracted work. Washington, DC is a prime example of how the private sector thrives around federal agencies. You drastically reduce government, you drastically reduce the jobs and current business and joint projects that are going on. However, with the void left by the absence of government fulfilling its regular duties, the private sector fills the gap. If you envision the government as the digestive tract, and the private sector as healthy gut bacteria which resides there for mutual benefit, it makes much more sense. You just had an appendectomy.

[[violet]]

I just had an issue called the "Long and Winding halls of %[CAPITAL]%." I chose option two, which involved gutting government spending. This resulted in every one of my industries increasing substantially, but the employment, economy, and economic output all fell. My economy fell from a 100 to a 98! It's completely nonsensical! Why would cutting taxes in half cause my economy to drop but all of my industries to skyrocket?

The industry bumps are a quirk (not a bug) of the new system. There was a potential correction in the works in beta, but it ended up causing more problems than it solved.

The drop in the economy is pretty understandable. You gutted your government.

Luna asked me to take a look at this.

So, firstly, as Luna says, "gutting" your government will always cause an immediate economic drop, assuming your government is of reasonable size, since you're putting a lot of people out of work and withdrawing a lot of spending.

Some of that labor force, capital, and mental energy will find its way elsewhere, which is why you notice rises in your industries. (This is the "quirk" Luna mentions.) It's not quite correct that your industries "skyrocketed," though, since they grew by an average of 1.8%.

Some movement of this kind always occurs between industries and government departments, so that a significant rise in any one is usually accompanied by a small but noticeable decrease in the others, and vice versa.

[[violet]]

Leaving the internet providers to run themselves in Broadband going to the birds raises taxes +0.22% and lowers freedom from taxation -0.15%

This is a tiny change: I see your tax rate is 9.55%, so we're talking about a rise from 9.53%. This is so small it's not really worth figuring out whether it should have been positive or negative.

But what you're seeing is the result of several competing effects, and some ever-so-slightly overpowering the others. The prime effect of this issue choice is indeed to cut government spending on IT providers, which can only lower taxes. However, another effect is to crimp the size of the IT industry. That's one of your nation's largest industries, and a major source of tax revenue. So there is a counterbalancing effect there where the shrinking private industry means the same tax burden has to be spread over a smaller private sector, which can cause a rise in the tax rate.

Also, in some cases, cutting government support for business can have quite drastic economic consequences, if industry is largely dependent on that support rather than being honed by a competitive market. That doesn't seem to be the case in this nation, though.

[Trotterdam]

I just had an issue called the "Long and Winding halls of %[CAPITAL]%." I chose option two, which involved gutting government spending.

No, option one involved gutting government spending. Option two involved spending more money on figuring out where you're spending too much money.

I can confirm from your recent happenings that you in fact chose option one. Or at least, what was option one last time it was posted to the spoiler thread...

[Daoine pacaiste]

So for a long time I was a fully socilist state which was fun, but eventually I got a issue that allowed me to legalize some private industry(turned out to be about 35%) mostly because a lot of the issues are based around private industry and I was getting them in a socilist state and it was breaking my immersion.

So anyway this turned out pretty good and gave my economy a big boost which was good.

Getting to the point, the weird thing that happens was that my employment dropped out of nowhere when I did this by over half. So my economy grew greatly but employment drops? And income equality actually stayed about the same.

Seriously this pissed me off since I was top 3% of the world on employment, I was hoping it would be my first top 1%, one of my best demographics is now one of my worst.

It just seems like employment dropping would hurt the economy, not the economy gets better while it drops.

[Annihilators of Chan Island]

In issue 418 "That Sinking Feeling", option 3 lowers tourism... which is strange as this option explicitly is about advertising the disaster to tourists.

[[violet]]

So for a long time I was a fully socilist state which was fun, but eventually I got a issue that allowed me to legalize some private industry(turned out to be about 35%) mostly because a lot of the issues are based around private industry and I was getting them in a socilist state and it was breaking my immersion.

So anyway this turned out pretty good and gave my economy a big boost which was good.

Getting to the point, the weird thing that happens was that my employment dropped out of nowhere when I did this by over half. So my economy grew greatly but employment drops? And income equality actually stayed about the same.

Fully socialist states don't work like capitalist ones in a few key ways. One of these is workforce participation, and transitioning from socialist to capitalist like you describe will almost always lead to an immediate rise in unemployment.

This is because a socialist state is exempt from many of the usual pressures on job creation, such as each job needing to be profitable for the employer and worthwhile to the employee. For example, in a capitalist state, high regulation, high taxes, and strong welfare all usually create unemployment, since they make it both harder to employ people and less worthwhile to be employed. (Why work if I'm going to lose all the extra income in taxes, or if the extra income isn't much more than welfare?) In socialist states, however, those things are far less relevant, and workforce participation tends to be naturally high since mass employment is a socialist priority.

[Ratateague]

This one. Not too recent, no, but since the change.

Still not seeing it. Your nation is already so unbelievably incorruptible that changes are going to be hard to come by for you in that stat period.

Neither of your Corruption or Compliance graphs show a change at all. If there was a change, it would have had to be extremely minute and due to how on the fringe you are corruption-wise.

Yep. Corruption definitely increases. Lyssenlik just answered the issue, Corruption went up by 7.1%. And I'm sure I chose the right option: "2 minutes ago: Following new legislation in Lyssenlik, political parties are banned from advertising and receiving private donations. "

[Nuevo Meshiko]

Still not seeing it. Your nation is already so unbelievably incorruptible that changes are going to be hard to come by for you in that stat period.

Neither of your Corruption or Compliance graphs show a change at all. If there was a change, it would have had to be extremely minute and due to how on the fringe you are corruption-wise.

Yep. Corruption definitely increases. Lyssenlik just answered the issue, Corruption went up by 7.1%. And I'm sure I chose the right option: "2 minutes ago: Following new legislation in Lyssenlik, political parties are banned from advertising and receiving private donations. "

I also answered this issue not long ago. Corruption also went up, which seemed odd at the time, but I shrugged it off.

[Leppikania]

Option 353.1: both taxation and freedom from taxation go down.