Nation States economic model thread

[Urban Ranger]

[Note: this is an OOC thread]

Okay, most of us agreed that some significant parts of the NS program is broken. The question is how do we work around them? I think the important thing to do is to derive an acceptable economic model for various countries based on a few simple numbers we can accertain. Wconomy is essential for estimating military strength, and I have a feeling that we will soon need those estimates.

[Archaic]

One thing I believe we cannot avoid is accepting the UN category we are given in Nationstates. If we're even going to use the Nationstates platform instead of making this a freeform RPG, we need to accept that some parts of the NS system are soverign, and that we must accept what they say regardless of what we'd like to have happen in our nations

For example, Alecrast is now correctly a Capitalist Paradise, but when it slipped into Anarchy all that time ago, I had to roleplay it, which I did with the attacks on Alecrast (Which Sheep later said in OCC had been launched by Sheepsta, without me even prompting him or anything) in the HSA disaster.

[Whaleboy]

Agreed. I will post a thread soon proposing a council of judges, separate to the court, who can judge about whether nations can field their militaries and the content of their militaries, for that I propose that myself, Drogue and Urban Ranger, because of our realistic militaries and scientific/economic/technical knowledge could be judges (just an idea).

With regards to the rest of a nation, it would be cool if we can find a more accurate economic model (any ideas?) on the internet, as opposed to Nationstates.net, upon which we can base our nations, although there is an argument for moving that beyond the NS forum, but I dont see that being necessary, as there will undoubtably be some that use NS2 when that comes out.

Any ideas for a better online economic model?

[Whaleboy]

Of course, we should keep some parts of NS, if we cannot move beyond that, for example, UN classification as Archaic said.

Such stuff as tax rates as well, we can use as well.

[Archaic]

Income Tax rates anyway. I think a lot of us will be explaining other things through different tax systems, or other work arounds, ne?

As for a better economic model.....why not for the trading aspects a simple supply and demand model, with there being seperate supply and demand graphs for each of the seperate industries that the game details for us (ie. Gambling, Book Publishing, Information Technology, Uranium Mining, etc)?

[Drogue]

That would take ages for each, and there would be much debate as to the nature of the graph. I think you just have to look aty a nation, state your figure and argue why it is correct. Obviously the economy rating is important, as are industry sizes, economy sizes, UN catagory, etc. It is impossible to come up with an accurate formula, with that many variables, so i think people should try to explain their position, and then maybe a panel as Elijah suggested who decide if their argument is feasable. It's not perfect, but it's better than what we have IMHO.

[Drogue]

Also, with regards to military, there is a UN Report for the spending per capita. Seems pretty simple to look at that, see what others around you have, and put it higher than peopel below you, lower than peopel above, and multiply by population. Since NS says who has higher spending per capita, it is stating the strength of their armies. Hence someone with less pop and lower on the list than someone else has a smaller military, and vice versa.

[Urban Ranger]

First of all, I don't think any nation would be in the Basket Case or the Imploded category unless it is like Cuba or DPRK (embargoes for decades) or some African countries and Afghanistan (extensive civil wars, no central government, complete destruction of infrastructures and industries).

[GeneralTacticus]

First of all, I don't think any nation would be in the Basket Case or the Imploded category unless it is like Cuba or DPRK (embargoes for decades) or some African countries and Afghanistan (extensive civil wars, no central government, complete destruction of infrastructures and industries).

No need for an actual embargo; a simple lack of trade or tradable goods, if combined with an inept government, could have just the same effect. If nobody wants to buy what you have to sell, and you don't bother making it better, you'd have no trade and probably a poor internal economy to boot, without the need for an embargo or internal disruption (although internal troubles would probably result from such a situation).

[Urban Ranger]

I reckon if trading is not actively disrupted, it's very unlikely for a country to have an economic rating at Imploded or Basket Case for any extended period of time. The only exception is probably The Great Depression.

[GeneralTacticus]

Well, if the economy is just sitting there without growing, and there's no capital avilable to start it up again, then absent some kind of direct government action, I'd say a nation could stay that way for quite a while.