Should the Finance and Trade ministries be merged into a "Ministry of Economy" ?

[Spiffor]

Ministry of Finance - Ministry of Trade merger proposal

As you already know, 2 ministers currently care on our treasury :
- the minister of finance has to manage the sliders of science and luxury. He also must check the efficiency of the cities concerning commerce, and petition the city planner to build marketplaces and banks when the need arise.
- the minister of trade has to keep track of unconnected cities and unconnected goods. He decides trades which are purely involving goods and gold, and has some decision power in trades involving goods among other things (tech, diplomactic agreements). The minister of trade should also haggle to tell the other ministers what would be the best deal.

These two ministries have very narrow functions each. And dividing these functions between two people may hurt cohesion in our money policy.


That's why an idea arose, a big "Ministry of Economy" whose role would encompass those of the two ministries above. The ministry of economy would have an intendance mission : providing what the other ministries need to work properly. But this ministry wouldn't influence decisions of the other ministers.

The functions of the Ministry of Economy will precisely be :
- To adjust the sliders in agreement with the People or the President. These two get actually to decide who should get what budget. The minister of economy should only give documented advice.
- To check if cities produce a good amount of money, and petition the city planner to build marketplaces and banks where it has to be. The minister of economy has no direct power on cities however.
- To check if resources and luxuries are well dispatched in the empire, and to petition the minister of public works if different. The minister of economy has no direct power on workers.
- To establish trades with the AI involving resources, luxuries or gold.
- To haggle gold amounts in a trade decided by the foreign minister. The minister of economy has to agree with trades involving goods among other things (example, he has to agree to a suggested "Fur for IronWorking" trade). The minister of economy has no direct power on trades involving gold among other things, but no trade goods.

The Minister of Economy loses a function of the Minister of Trade in the process : the ability to call for trade embargoes, which goes to the foreign advisor.

3 things more :
- this proposal, if accepted, will be effective next term. It won't change the organization of the government during this turn.
- this proposal will need a 2/3 majority in the poll to be effective, as it's an amendment to the constitution.
- the creation of the ministry of economy would make the trade and finance ministries irrelevant. Trade and Finance ministries would then be deleted.

This poll will last 5 days.

[GodKing]

New election?

[Spiffor]

No new election. The posts remain as they are until the end of the term.

[MrWhereItsAt]

GOD yes!

The less redundant posts and bureaucracy, the simpler the game is, the better. I believe even the Ministers concerned have expressed annoyance at the level of overlap some of their duties deal with.

[Sheik]

I agree with MrWhereItsAt. I would be interested to hear why some people think no.

[Ninot]

- To haggle gold amounts in a trade decided by the foreign minister. The minister of economy has to agree with trades involving goods among other things (example, he has to agree to a suggested "Fur for IronWorking" trade). The minister of economy has no direct power on trades involving gold among other things, but no trade goods.

The Minister of Economy loses a function of the Minister of Trade in the process : the ability to call for trade embargoes, which goes to the foreign advisor.

First the former:

I agree with pretty much everything there. It gets confuzing when both the Trade (Economy) minister and Foreign Minister have to agree on the particulars of a trade to make it work.

However, i am slightly bothered by the "Fur for IronWorking" trade idea. As you state it, both the Foreign and Economic minister would have to agree. What if they disagree. Like what if either one of us says yes, and the other says no? Then what? Who overrides, who's decision takes more importance? Does it come down to the President, or possibly a vote?

Oh, as for the latter, i find that agreeable. Trade embargoes are much more political than economical I thnk. I mean, IRL, trade embargoes can be more economically minded, but in game, its all political in that field.

[Andreiguy]

It seems to me that this would be creating a very powerful branch. I believe that "Trade" and "Finance" cannot both fall under "Economy". In most real-world countries, an Interior department handles finance etc., but Trade is not only interior, but also involves other nations. Resources and Gold are only fundamentally related during trading with other nations.

The Minister of Economy loses a function of the Minister of Trade in the process : the ability to call for trade embargoes, which goes to the foreign advisor.

***I disagree with this. If you're going to squeeze Trade into "Economy", then the Minister of Economy should definitely have much say in this. Embargoes can be created just out of foreign relations spite, but usually (at least for me) they are created to deny a certain country of a certain resource. For example, if it is later in the game and I have just dealt Country X a crushing blow, but cannot or don't want to completely destroy them, I do want to prevent that country from gaining power again. This can be secured by denying that country of, say, Iron, Saltpeper, Oil, Uranium, etc, vital resources, and even luxuries to make sure they have a hard time with maintaining happiness. In other words, I believe that embargoes should fall under the jurisdiction of Economy (if it's created) and the other advisors (Foreign of course, Military) should have say as well.

[Ninot]

Embargoes can be created just out of foreign relations spite, but usually (at least for me) they are created to deny a certain country of a certain resource.

K.. imho, denying a country of a certain resource will not be done purely for economic reasons in game....not ever. We will start embargoes to choke away their abilities to build certain units, and perhaps to throw their civ into anarchy. But if a trade embargo ever had purely economic reasons behind, i have yet to see it.

I can see how it works IRL. Countries would do it to keep others out of a market, for their own betterment. But in game, all trade embargoes will never have economic spins to them. If anything, a trade embargo would be harmful to our own economy, if it is also denying our ability to trade with that nation. No offense to you, but I see no way a trade embargo is more economic minded than it is militarily or politically.

[Andreiguy]

lol...the Foreign Affairs minister speaks about his new-found power, no offense...

Say we crush France. Utterly. They are left with a couple cities, but as most of our leaders have said, we will not destroy them because we need them for technology trading etc. So. Do we want France finding a new source of iron, just as do we want France going out and expanding on another continent? An embargo against France would seal the Pinks' inevitable subjugation and vassalisation by Apolytonia. So, it does have very much foreign and military weight. But...Trade/Economy is who deals with resources, and a trade embargo does just the same, so an Economic advisor must have at least some input in decision-making power on embargoes.

[Ninot]

agreed, they should have quite a bit of input in a trade embargo plan. After all, if a military of foreign advisor signed a trade embargo without consulting the economy minister, thats one more person to trade with that is no longer a trade partner.

i whole heartedly agree that trade embargoes do have quite a lot of effect for the economics and thus, that minister. but whether or not it should be in his power alone to request an embargo? no, i think it should be left to other hands, while the economy minister still should put his suggestions in.

[Andreiguy]

agreed.
i guess this economy ministry will do the job...
however, i'm not sure about the late game, with (hopefully) so many cities and so many trades constantly, I think that it will require two ministries.

[Adagio]

At the moment, we only need one, but later we might need the two different posts...

[Spiffor]

Except the science advisor, who'll have circa as much work in the beginning and in the late game, every ministry will need several people to manage it : war, workers, wity planning etc. will do much work in the late game.
The ministry of economy is an idea to get rid of 2 small ministries, and to create a ministry as big as the others, for the sake of cohesion within the government.

[GePap]

Sould only be one

The trade misniter as is really only has duties when it comes to the foreign relations window, and decisions here are also made by the Foreign minister, sceince minister and so forth. As is then, it is a sort of powerless entity and should be merged with somebody else right quick.

Personally thought, I think the correct merger is not Trade and Finance, but Trade and Foreign minister, just like they are lumped together in the Civ3 interfae (really, who ever goes to check the 'trade miister' in the game?)

[GoodFella]

I agree with GePap. Combine Trade with Foregin Affairs - for the time being.