I need help... lots and lots of help

[The_Blind_One]

Just a matter of metrics...
Or as J.Geils said, "First I look at the purse."

...

While inflation is annoying, I noted in another post that as long as I have residual revenues, inflation is not really an issue, until it gets over 12%. Depends on the region. Unemployment is more significant. I pretty much monitor the margin of production expense and domestic sales and that also has a direct correspondence to inflation. Increase that margin and inflation goes down.

I know all of that aswell, but inflation eventually DOES cost u the extra $$$ over time...I wan't a clean efficient non-inflation bugged economy that grows really darn fast...lets say higher than 5% growth a year. But no increase in inflation as that just costs money.

Higher gdp/c leads to more efficient production and more research. More happy people etc etc etc...more money...for war

In some game's it's really no use to build up an army cuz urs is so small anyway...just wait till unification and thats it but u can build ur eco in the same time that's what I do

[Il Duce]

hmmm...

Thinking of the real world, it would be unlikely to see growth > 5% without a real struggle to keep inflation under control. Real wages would never be able to keep up, and if they did, you'd be seeing some 1980 style inflation for sure. Lots of interesting issues. Imagine what would happen to housing and property prices, not to mention unsecured credit rates [which is what most people in America seem to be living on these days]. There was a time in the 80's when credit card interest was deductible, and the interest rates were below the inflation rate. Unbridled consumption resulted. Until the mid-80's recession. sigh.

I pretty much stick to campaigns on maps without unification votes, so I guess my premises are skewed to skimming cash off of a high maintenance infrastructure.

Hey - harrisonater: how are your econ studies doing?

[The_Blind_One]

hmmm...

Thinking of the real world, it would be unlikely to see growth > 5% without a real struggle to keep inflation under control. Real wages would never be able to keep up, and if they did, you'd be seeing some 1980 style inflation for sure. Lots of interesting issues. Imagine what would happen to housing and property prices, not to mention unsecured credit rates [which is what most people in America seem to be living on these days]. There was a time in the 80's when credit card interest was deductible, and the interest rates were below the inflation rate. Unbridled consumption resulted. Until the mid-80's recession. sigh.

I pretty much stick to campaigns on maps without unification votes, so I guess my premises are skewed to skimming cash off of a high maintenance infrastructure.

Hey - harrisonater: how are your econ studies doing?

Even so...(not totally accurate but they are true)

Hong Kong growth 8.9%, gdp/c 35800
Ukraine, 12%, gdp/c 7200
China 9%, gdp/c 5200

While I agree with u that growth can't be as high as ukraine with 12% with a region like hong kong without gaining inflation. Still 12% or other such numbers should be able to be kept up with undeveloped countries without inflation, that's cuz their dynamics of economics is not as complicated as ours yet (economic theory of growth).

The real world;
All ur really doing with those high eco's like germany and the US is increasing work-hour productivity, that's the best economic growth possible. More work done in less time that's just a matter of upgrading machine's and should actually increase unemployment because more people get layed of because of more machine's are doing the job.

The game;
Currently u would say that the ''efficiency'' slider in the commerce department would take care of that, by constantly increasing production, better machine's resulting in better work-hour productivity.

Wrong! although it does increase unemployment at first...this is only a set % depending on ur investment.
Yes it's supposedly subsidising and handing out better machine's to lower the cost-price but yet again...that's only a fixed %.
Now here's the real killer, in the normal world, investments are counted as extra income to the gdp, however in this game...they subtract it! Try it out if u will, the more u invest the more ur gdp/c will shrink or ur growth will slow down. So by no means can it let ur economy grow as it actually shrinks it...(it does become more efficient however...but pollution and enviromental damage isn't calculated by the game anyway...so who cares?)

I'd like therefore a way to increase work-hour productivity that decreases inflation and increases unemployment and increases the economic growth of the region. This could be done by making the investment sliders count extra to the gdp income as ''investments'', and give an equally powerfull shock of lowering inflation so ur investments don't go into waste into inflation. Actually building facilities is just allowing more workers to work, not increasing their work-hour productivity. That brings me to another thing.
Something wich BG must really consider revamping...unemployment model. While the economy of europe might be smaller than america, the work-hour productivity in europe is actually higher than in america. That simply means that a european earns more in a workhour. Americans work about 26% more hours then most west-europese. One might say that America has a bigger economy...but europe could easily match that by simply working another extra 26% in work-hours (given the industrial capacity is there). But such growth of an extra 26% in gdp/c could really happen if serious matters where to be taken and it would be done in a well worked out goverment plan. Another thing to be taken into account would be man-woman workhours alot more women are working in the western nations compared to the rest, that means if u were able to allocate women to work u would have alot of surpless labour...aka unemployment...where are these women?

Plz I know the economic model is complicated as is...but it totally defies logic at this point

[Il Duce]

Two things to consider.

It is unlikely, at this point, that BG will undertake major surgery on the econ engine. That discussion has run on many threads elsewhere. You pretty much have to take the game as it stands at this point. Overall, I give them high marks for incorporating the level of complexity that they have, and producing a game that provides the 'back end' of being a national leader as well as the military challenge. If you get me started here, I'll probably point out that a great deal of work also needs to be done on the diplomacy engine before the econ engine, as that would expand a whole new aspect whose absence is notable. 'nuff of that.

As far as your econ examples go, I think you should be careful not to hold up a strawman argument. You are pretty much comparing apples to octopi here. China is not an economy as we know it - it is essentially a slave labor machine that is missing the supply-demand dynamic as well as having its currency pegged to the US Dollar. There is no real way to measure it [all info is dubious, and it fits no econometric model that resembles anything]. You can be sure that when China unpegs [either by choice or by market force] they will suffer a severe inflation/crash. If the Chinese central bank doesn't get on the ball real soon, at some point one or the other foreign exchange markets will begin to trade the Yuan on an unpegged basis, probably by offering a futures/options complex. Then we'll know what it's really worth. Of course, one could argue that the SR2010 econ model is closer to China than anything else, so maybe your example holds water in the context of the game.

Hong Kong is a similarly exceptional case, being a closed box as far as expanding its territory, population, and asset base - remember, HK is now a Chinese free trade zone, supported by subsidies and special concessions: an aberration.

Ukraine is a freshly developing economy - basically just entering the industrial age. Using percentages to measure it is misleading - 12% of nothing is still nothing. And you can expect the Ukraine to also enter a long period of inflation, perhaps not this year, but soon. You don't see everyone in Europe moving to Ukraine to participate in the rapidly improving quality of life there.

[The_Blind_One]

where the hell do u live? United States?
That's some serious bullshit ur telling me here.

China is not an economy as we know it - it is essentially a slave labor machine that is missing the supply-demand dynamic as well as having its currency pegged to the US Dollar. There is no real way to measure it [all info is dubious, and it fits no econometric model that resembles anything]. You can be sure that when China unpegs [either by choice or by market force] they will suffer a severe inflation/crash. If the Chinese central bank doesn't get on the ball real soon, at some point one or the other foreign exchange markets will begin to trade the Yuan on an unpegged basis, probably by offering a futures/options complex.

Bullshit, foreign investment effect on the chinese economy was minimal to what analysts had thought. The huge increase in the economy of china was the constant consumer spending of the chinese population. The foreign investment wasn't dubbed as barely noticable...like 0.1% economic investment.

True is that china is constantly overflowing everyone with manufactured goods at the moment and will continue to do so for another 15 years or so because just like hong kong, south korea, taiwan, singapore and all the other tigers, u start out with a cheap manufacturing base and build ur way up. That's what we did aswell...only we started that earlier...(1950 early)

Now the problem everyone THINKS why china would stop growth is because it is rapidly changing capital flows in the world (rising oil price anyone???), china can keep up this growth just as much like the other asian tigers could, the only problem the western nations have...our manufacturing base is getting overflooded...because china has 1.3 billion people

But export isn't actually all that much for china's economy...so basictly it's just helping it grow...it's not it's fundemental keystone

Ukraine is a freshly developing economy - basically just entering the industrial age. Using percentages to measure it is misleading - 12% of nothing is still nothing. And you can expect the Ukraine to also enter a long period of inflation, perhaps not this year, but soon. You don't see everyone in Europe moving to Ukraine to participate in the rapidly improving quality of life there.

Same goes for ukraine as goes for china...