The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Originally posted by Kidicious
I think LoA thought that I was talking about what the consumer would do. I was talking about what the govt should do. That's my bad.
Let the markets work out supply/demand. Any instant financial or tax credit incentives for alternatives won't help quickly enough.
As oil prices up, alterntives out the wazoo become more cost-effective.
Oh, and give the Israelis the green light.
When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."
Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
ok guys, im going to have to bust out the microeconomic demand graph that shows government intervention. gimme a coupla minutes to draw it
To show what?
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh
When Px = 1, Py=1 and I= 100, we have optimal consumption at X* = 50 and Y*=50. This is point A on the graph. This lies along the indifference curve where U = 50
When Px = 2 and Py = 1, we have a new optimal consumption at X** = 25 and Y** = 50. This is point B on the graph. As you can see, when price of oil increases, you consume less of it. We also see that the consumer derives less utility, as it has decreased from 50 to 35.4.
The minimized expenditure gives us point A’, which is where the consumer will buy 35.4 units of oil and 70.7 units of y. At A’, we have U* = 50, Px = 2 and Py = 1. V = indirect utility. In this case, it is U which we are holding constant at U = 50
Lets say the price goes to $2 for oil. The government decides to subsidize oil. The price of oil then falls to $1. The government pays $50 and the consumers pay $50.
Lets say the price goes to $2 for oil. The government decides to give the consumers cash. This increases their income, and they now buy at point A’, which gives them more of both goods then before. This costs the government just over $20.
It is cheaper to just give them the cash in this case.
Attached Files
"Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini
Originally posted by Lancer
You can post in this thread or my skull sucking locust aliens thread, which is more realistic. Btw, when the aliens land and start rounding up humans for brain food, it will likely effect the markets.
I want to be perfectly clear on that.
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
True, but the issue is macroeconomic, because it concerns the effect on the whole economy, and what govt action would, or wouldn't, be appropriate.
the issue is also microeconomic - i just showed you what government action would or wouldnt be appropriate. the total effect is of course macroeconomic, but we can also look at this issue from a micro standpoint as i did.
"Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini
If oil consumption drops--you have to consider the entire range of jobs effected.
1) Rich middle eastern *******s
2) Poor middle eastern well workers
3) Rich American *******s
4) American well workers
5) Tankers + crew
6) Gas station operators
Consider the effect on the economies of Texas, South AR, and the other oil producing parts of the US (and Europe) when their product falls in demand. It isn't just a middle east problem.
And what happens when the ME is no longer economically worthwhile to keep screwing up? Do we just abandon those peoples to dictatorships and destruction like we have with other economically worthless areas? (Africa, for example)
And don't get me started about how much else oil is needed for. Plastics, chemicals...people talk about getting rid of the oil dependency but it is a hell of a lot easier thought up than risked. When we move away from gasoline cars we need to consider every angle to such a monumental economy ****.
Comment