Minister of Trade: Tax Rate?

[Sparrowhawk]

Found this in the archives before I posted the poll:

Trade Minister's Responsibilities
-All uses of caravans (Wonders, trade with ourselves/others, rushing other things)
-Setting tax rate (in conjunction with Science Advisor)

The citizens complain of being taxed where we are running a surplus budget and need additional science. While I am tempted to ignore their pleas for tax relief, I feel I must at least poll on the topic to ensure that the Ministers at least support my tax plan (and the Ministerial Retirement Fund that those taxes are paying for )

First question is should we stop Xinning (which is more of a Science question, but I think our Science Minister is okay with me asking as if we don't stop Xinning, it probably doesn't make sense to adjust the tax rate either). (while Xinning Apolytonia has a beaker output of 48/turn and on non-Xin turns has 22/turn for an average of 35/turn)

(All of the below is assuming we vote to stop Xinning; if we continue Xinning and you still think we should change tax rate please post so below)

Should we change our tax rate and encourage science rather then increased gold? Our Treasury currently sits at 547 Gold.

Our tax rates are currently: 50% Tax (T), 30% Science (S) and 20% Luxuries (L). I don't think we should adjust Luxuries as the 20% is keeping our cities happy and it would need a dramatic increase to get our only size 3 city (Utica) celebrating (70% Lux ).

Therefore, should adjsut taxes to:
50T, 30S, 20L
(which results in a surplus of 33 gold per turn and new techs every 14 turns- 28 beakers/turn); (this is out current setting)

40T, 40S, 20L
Surplus 22 Gold, 9 Turns/tech (39 Beakers/turn)

30T, 50S, 20L
Surplus 15 Gold, 9 Turns/tech (46 Beakers/turn)

20T, 60S, 20L
Surplus 6 Gold, 8 Turns/tech (55 Beakers/turn)

10T, 70S, 20L
Deficit of -5 Gold, 6 Turns/tech (66 Beakers/turn)

0T, 80S, 20L
Deficit of -15 Gold, 6 Turns/tech (76 Beakers/turn)

Or if you think we should adjust the Luxuries up or the Science down, please post it and check the write in option on the poll.

One other option is that we could start selling the bananas we have been accumulating, which might make us enough income to allow for a 0% tax

[rjmatsleepers]

I voted for 60% research. I also voted to stop Xinning. This is because at 60% research I suspect that the benefit of Xinning will be very small. But someone might like to check this since I do get these things wrong from time to time.

This will give us a very small tax surplus, but I believe we should aim to get our income from trade rather than tax. (I suspect the spirit of the great communicator might approve of this sentiment )

RJM at Sleeper's

[Sparrowhawk]

I probably wasn't very clear in the post , but I beleive that any increase in science decreases the benefit of Xinning (therefore I think that if we continue Xinning that we shouldn't adjust the tax rate )

[Bloody Monk]

I voted for 70% S.

The difference in tax collection between 60 and 70 is only 11g. At 60, one is trading 22g for 2 turns longer discoveries. As was so beautifully stated, we can get our gold from occasional trading.

Good poll, Sparrowhawk!!

Monk

[cavebear]

The difference between 60S and 70S is that we gain 2 turns per tech and lose 78G at 70S. I surely want the techs, but will we recoup 78G every 6 turns? That would be very difficult. And if we are counting on getting gold through trades, we should consider that we would be getting bonus beakers that way, too. So the benefit of 70S over 60S would be less.

I'll vote for 60S. That way we will keep the gold income positive and probably get a better tech rate (than 8 turns) from the trading anyway. We can use the extra gold to rushbuild things/units we need.

[Bloody Monk]

*Reminds self to check math assumptions.

*Wonders how to change a vote in a poll??

I voted 70. Please burn that ballot and record me under 60. Thanks.

Monk

[Sparrowhawk]

Noted Monk and I will count your vote as 60% S rather then 70% (but if Cavebear can change votes please post so that I know that I don't have to take that into account)

[Bloody Monk]

Thanks, SH. I, too,wondered if cavebear had the Power to change the vote for me. How much leeway does a mini-mod have??

Monk

[Ben Kenobi]

Here's my plan...

Since we are at techs every 14 turns, which is not so hot, and are facing a cash crunch, this is what I would recommend.

1. Revolt to Monarchy.
2. Adjust sliders to 50 / 0 / 50 until our capital celebrates.

3. Readjust luxuries, and top up our cash. This way we can build up our small cities, and build more units for defense.

We need the cash now. Science is not our priority, and will not really help us until we get our tech rate down from 14. We are sacrificing long-term growth for stagnant gains.

[Bloody Monk]

Re Ben's Plan...

As stated elsewhere, a Bank will make it easier for Apoly' to celebrate.

Monk

[Bloody Monk]

Re: Ben's Plan

Upon Further Review...

Ben, you have thrown up a strawman in pegging Science at 14T. On the alternate turns of Xin, it is 8T. An average sets it at 11T. But wait again. The current discussion is to stop the Xin and reset the sliders. At 60% Science, discoveries are at 8T. 8 is a lot different than 14. That's more than one discovery a turnset without any deliveries. The downside is this gives only +6g per turn.

An even up comparison for Monarchy with Celebration after one turn would have sliders at 2.3.5 giving +4g/10T...favoring cash, as you suggest, at 60% tax gives +38g/58T. Pegging Science at zero gives +46g/405T.

All things held equal, Monarchy + a turn of disorder do not seem very helpful, now.

But later, when we start keeping Settlers around for roads, etc., Monarchy will compare very well. Then the free units and 1 less food per Settler per turn will make Monarchy necessary. As long as the number of long term units stays low in the Colony, the extra arrows from Republic look stronger. Or so it seems to me, anyway.

Monk

[cavebear]

I can't change the actual votes in a poll. In fact about the only thing I can do to a poll is change the subject line or close it. I suppose I could "stick it" at the top of the forum, too.

[cavebear]

I agree that Republic is still better for us right now. To be honest, I had wondered about reverting to Monarchy, myself. But the numbers work better in Republic at 60S and 20L.

[Hydey]

vans will help tax & science

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm thinking along the lines of Hydey, and the no-science game.

We need units and infrastructure in order to develop our colonies. While 8 techs/turn is decent, we are still very much behind everyone else.

I think we will do better to crank up the taxes to 70/0/30 after building the bank and then reviving our science rate through caravans.

If we are to recover the ground lost on the AI, then we need to build our cities, and then start to develop them so that we get a boost on our economy. Once our economy gets rolling, then it is much easier to produce units, and white goods.

I've had plenty of successes in starting from a weak empire, and the most important step is to generate the tax income required to rushbuild improvements and units. The quickest way to do so is to jack up our tax rate.

Shifiting to a monarchy enables us to expand without worrying about happiness problems beset by a republic, and allows us to build the city improvements needed to keep the peace and expand our population. Once we have this base, then we can shift back to a Republic, and make up for our lost time quite dramatically.