NATION

PASSWORD

#443: Five Year Plans And New Deals needs revised or removed

A place to spoil daily issues for those who haven't had them yet, snigger at typos, and discuss ideas for new ones.
User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

#443: Five Year Plans And New Deals needs revised or removed

Postby PurgatoryHell » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:17 pm

I have spent literally more than five years building my economy and this issue took my GDP from 11,000 Trillion to imploded at less than 500 Trillion.

No single issue should have this much effect on years and years of work. It's extremely frustrating and demoralizing to see all of my work negated by this.

You have no idea how upsetting this can be. These kinds of drastic effects should never be allowed.
Last edited by PurgatoryHell on Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sedgistan
Senior Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 30989
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:41 am

Some issues have to have strong effects, to allow nations to change direction. While many people like to build their nations up constantly in one direction, there has to be a way for them to change course, and without taking several years of contrary decisions to do so.

In your case, you'd built up your business subsidies over a number of years to boost your economic strength. You chose an option that says:
"What socialistic nonsense," retorts Finance Minister @@RANDOMNAME@@, taking a break from scowling at jobless protesters. "That food price shock wasn't because of too little government meddling. The real cause was bad planning, a side-effect of half-baked subsidies. 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. And if some people still can't find bread, then let them eat cake."

...which as it says, cut all your business subsidies. That is obviously going to have a big impact on your economy.

Having said all that, you've got a relatively high level of economic freedoms, which should keep your economy fairly strong. There's a slight disjoint in representing this on the trend graph as a result of some changes from the refactoring a while ago. I've brought it up with the admins again, to see if it can be resolved.

Note: that's re. the economic freedoms, not restoring your level of business subsidies. You chose to cut them, and thus you'll have to build them up again if you wish to.

User avatar
Harkback Union
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17196
Founded: Sep 01, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Harkback Union » Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:46 am

But from 100 to 0?
Last edited by Harkback Union on Fri Jul 31, 2015 12:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:01 am

No. The option is very misleading. It says to cut all unprofitable businesses. Not every subsidy. I didn't choose to cut every subsidy. Just unprofitable ones. This issue is a trap and 100-0d my nation.

You guys need to fix the issue. If it takes years to build it up it should take years to take it down. Your logic contradicts itself when you say that I need to start building from zero again. So where's the option to send it to 100?

User avatar
Harkback Union
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17196
Founded: Sep 01, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Harkback Union » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:09 am

Yeah, If 100% of business subsidies went to enterprises that didn't turn a profit and cutting said subsidies resulted 100% of the enterprises going bankrupt, then that suggest that 100% of them were un-profitable which wouldn't really make sense as then the economy should have collapsed long ago.

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:18 am

And that's what I'm gathering from it. There would have been no tax base and hyper inflation because there was no profit.

I had no inflation. My exchange rate was 2.14-1 in my favor.

I'm not buying the explanation. I've been playing long enough and have championed an excellent economy long enough to have a general idea what is going to happen by reading the option. That wasn't the case there. This is way overboard and did the exact opposite of what I would have ever expected.

I think this is one of those very rare instances that have never happened that you guys need to revert back my stats. This issue is way overboard

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:29 am

And furthermore at my last check only around 15% of the entire government spending was spent on subsidiaries and industry. There is absolutely no way possible that 15% caused a 95% drop in my GDP.

I can't accept the explanation given to me. It doesn't add up.

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:14 pm

The guy is clearly an advocate for less-government intervention. "The market is smarter than a bunch of bureaucrats," So he's going to think ALL subsidized businesses are not profitable. Honestly, just spend one second thinking about who is advocating what option and what it could possibly mean for the nation instead of reading one sentence and assuming "Yeah! That totally isn't going to have a negative consequence!" And you won't have a problem.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Fri Jul 31, 2015 10:18 pm

You obviously don't get it. No single Issue should knock out 9,500 Trillion from a GDP

User avatar
Minoa
Senator
 
Posts: 4925
Founded: Oct 05, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Minoa » Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:34 pm

Hi,

What option number did you choose in #443? I can do something to warn others against choosing that option by adding it to my wiki issues database.

Sadly, issue effects are not reversible as far as I know.
Last edited by Minoa on Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Mme A. d'Oiseau, B.A. (State of Minoa)

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:03 pm

PurgatoryHell wrote:You obviously don't get it. No single Issue should knock out 9,500 Trillion from a GDP


You don't get it. It's the way you set up the economy. Obviously, with an economy as reliant as yours, it will start to crumble if even a few are removed. A purely free market capitalistic nation wouldn't get the same effect.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:15 pm

For 11 years I have understood how to build an economy. I get it way more than you do. This issue is just plain wrong. The results are back asswards. Youre not doing anything but arguing so I'm going to ask you to stop posting on this thread.

I'm trying to get a problem with an issue fixed. Not get lambasted by a complete fool.

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:20 pm

Minoa wrote:Hi,

What option number did you choose in #443? I can do something to warn others against choosing that option by adding it to my wiki issues database.

Sadly, issue effects are not reversible as far as I know.


Option 3. To remove government from the market and stop funding worthless endevours.

One would believe that removing government intervention would increase economic freedoms. And by defunding unprofitable enterprise than more money would get passed to profitable endevours.

Instead this issue guts your economy because it takes your tax rate to zero and eliminates all economic incentives. Unemployment goes to near 100% and GDP tanks 95%.

17% of my GDP was business subsidies and that 17% eliminated my entire economy. That's proof positive this issue is very very flawed in the way it dishes out results. It should be modified or removed.

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:28 pm

Also note this issue will completely ruin your nation. Nobody can take a 0 economy to 100. It is not possible the way the game works.

User avatar
Harkback Union
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17196
Founded: Sep 01, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Harkback Union » Sat Aug 01, 2015 11:24 pm

Valrifell wrote:The guy is clearly an advocate for less-government intervention. "The market is smarter than a bunch of bureaucrats," So he's going to think ALL subsidized businesses are not profitable. Honestly, just spend one second thinking about who is advocating what option and what it could possibly mean for the nation instead of reading one sentence and assuming "Yeah! That totally isn't going to have a negative consequence!" And you won't have a problem.


So the Issue basically does something different then it says? Are we supposed to do psychoanalysis on Imaginary people in the issues now based on the half line of text they have to say?
What would have made sense if this issue decreases subsidies at a similar rate other issues increase it.

User avatar
Kesshite
Envoy
 
Posts: 205
Founded: Jan 08, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Kesshite » Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:18 am

This sounds like a kissing-cousin to issue 221.

Notice that Shaktirajya's and Fauzjhia's economies remain at 0 despite having it tank in May and both being active since then.

Harkback Union wrote:But from 100 to 0?


And I wonder,
still I wonder,
Who'll stop the rain?
Last edited by Kesshite on Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
|The Holy Wilderness of Kesshite |
Together, Under the Velvet Paw.

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:17 pm

PurgatoryHell wrote:For 11 years I have understood how to build an economy. I get it way more than you do. This issue is just plain wrong. The results are back asswards. Youre not doing anything but arguing so I'm going to ask you to stop posting on this thread.

I'm trying to get a problem with an issue fixed. Not get lambasted by a complete fool.


Now you're talking down to me for not a god damn reason. I'm not the idiot here, you wanna get pissy at someone get pissy at the author or editor, I had no hand in this issue.
Last edited by Valrifell on Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31063
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Valrifell » Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:20 pm

Harkback Union wrote:
Valrifell wrote:The guy is clearly an advocate for less-government intervention. "The market is smarter than a bunch of bureaucrats," So he's going to think ALL subsidized businesses are not profitable. Honestly, just spend one second thinking about who is advocating what option and what it could possibly mean for the nation instead of reading one sentence and assuming "Yeah! That totally isn't going to have a negative consequence!" And you won't have a problem.


So the Issue basically does something different then it says? Are we supposed to do psychoanalysis on Imaginary people in the issues now based on the half line of text they have to say?
What would have made sense if this issue decreases subsidies at a similar rate other issues increase it.


No, I'm saying take obvious bias into account and think about what author intended the option to be like. It's not that hard to pick wisely.
Last edited by Valrifell on Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
HAVING AN ALL CAPS SIG MAKES ME FEEL SMART

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:18 pm

Valrifell wrote:
PurgatoryHell wrote:You obviously don't get it. No single Issue should knock out 9,500 Trillion from a GDP


You don't get it. It's the way you set up the economy. Obviously, with an economy as reliant as yours, it will start to crumble if even a few are removed. A purely free market capitalistic nation wouldn't get the same effect.


My pro market rating is 89. That's nearly as free market as the game allows. Try to check stats before you make an assumption. Nations with similar pro market ratings
Have had increased economies from this issue. I'm sticking to reason. This issue is flawed at its core.

User avatar
Torsiedelle
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18305
Founded: Dec 03, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Torsiedelle » Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:22 pm

I was also pretty much screwed over by this.

I've been building my economy back up since then. It's painfully slow, but I'm sure I can get it back up with time.
Rostavykhan is my Second Nation.
⋘EXCELSIOR⋙
To Cool For School

User avatar
Luna Amore
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 12919
Founded: Antiquity
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Luna Amore » Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:25 pm

Sedgistan wrote:Having said all that, you've got a relatively high level of economic freedoms, which should keep your economy fairly strong. There's a slight disjoint in representing this on the trend graph as a result of some changes from the refactoring a while ago. I've brought it up with the admins again, to see if it can be resolved.

It's already been brought up with the admins. We'll post here when they get back to us. There's no reason to post here until then, so please stop sniping each other.




Torsiedelle wrote:I was also pretty much screwed over by this.

I've been building my economy back up since then. It's painfully slow, but I'm sure I can get it back up with time.

You've never received issue #443.
Last edited by Luna Amore on Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:39 pm

Thanks Luna. My apologies

User avatar
[violet]
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15352
Founded: Antiquity

Postby [violet] » Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:53 pm

I'm looking into this. It's definitely a bad outcome: your Economy rating should be around 73, not zero.

User avatar
PurgatoryHell
Attaché
 
Posts: 69
Founded: Nov 10, 2004
Corporate Police State

Postby PurgatoryHell » Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:19 pm

Thank you very much Violet. It completely bewildered me as to why that happened. I had expected to take a hit in exchange for greater economic freedom but not a complete collapse
Last edited by PurgatoryHell on Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kingdinium
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Feb 02, 2005
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Kingdinium » Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:58 am

I've just had this same issue affect me. It's all rather annoying, having spent so many years building my economic rating up. At least the only way from here is up. I will be back at 100 soon, hopefully! :)
God save the Queen!

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads