Tax income

[georgios]

Well ir it is like that, even if your not paining the transportation, someone else does. In game you have a price to build and an international market price, optimal for international trade, but what about domestic trade?

I think that tranportation costs are covered by infrastructure expends.

should play in SR.

should play, but don't plays. in the beginning, it is better to simplify things and assume that all civilians have the same income, equal with GDP/c and thae pay a level tax equal with the general tax.

The worst thing is that the game don't gives details, how many are in each class and how they earned their income.

[EnemyShine]

In continuation of the proceedings. I've locked minister from changing any tax or social parameters and set average tax income 45% and social spendings 100%. Difference between tax income and social spendings grows when GDP/c increases, as result deficit higher. Is there way to do increase tax income faster than social spendings with increasing GDP? (I noticed when DAR higher, deficit lower but I can't hold it above 40% long time because with the growth gdp is growing consumption, and I have to increase domestic price, also unemployment 2.9% and slowly increase, maybe it influences.)

[GreenGoblin]

In continuation of the proceedings. I've locked minister from changing any tax or social parameters and set average tax income 45% and social spendings 100%. Difference between tax income and social spendings grows when GDP/c increases, as result deficit higher. Is there way to do increase tax income faster than social spendings with increasing GDP? (I noticed when DAR higher, deficit lower but I can't hold it above 40% long time because with the growth gdp is growing consumption, and I have to increase domestic price, also unemployment 2.9% and slowly increase, maybe it influences.)

Balancing tax with social spending is something the minister does well. The only reason I don't let him handle social spending is that infrastructure is the first thing to be cut when savings are needed. If you're playing a rich democracy then the minister should be able to get nearly 40% DAR and and increasing GDP/c if you just leave him to it.

[georgios]

Balancing tax with social spending is something the minister does well.

I agree. Minister gives the optimum values. And even when you change something, the system soon settles at the same profit. The reason is that you have not really power on your citizens. They have not a standard amount of cash, to be taken by force, with the proper DAR cost of course. Their tax ability is not the money they have, but the money they want to give if they are happy with you. This means that the biggest opponent of the game is your own people.

The only reason I don't let him handle social spending is that infrastructure is the first thing to be cut when savings are needed.

The game is bad programmed there... If social sectors have differend degree of usefulness, then locks were needed for every one, not all unlocked or all locked. Personally, I let all unlocked, believing that minister knows better if cuts infrastructure in favour of environment or culture.. But having controls for things we don't know how they work destroys game pleasure.

It would be beautiful if we could delete all social spending from the game, and replaced with products traded in the world market: healthcare, education... And they would affect the DAR like other products. If you were in shortage of doctors, then you might have trouble. And this could add an new field of competition.

In my mod, I created a new product "services" in an effort to simulate this. Services are produced in tourist attractions and business districts. If a region has hotels, it serves it's people need for vacation and sells this opportunity to foreigners, who give money directly to their destination. In the same logic business districts sell services to the locals and to foreigners.