Taxxing trade income.

[Doom]

Having trade taxed by the alliance could help generate extra income for the alliance for that income. I think it should be tied to the alliance money tax rate so an alliance cant completely make it where you cant trade. Furthermore, resources gained via trading can be taxed in the same way to keep it balanced and have it based off alliance resource tax rate. Ill then leave off with the fact that alliance should also have an option to allow no trade taxes without affecting alliance tax rates.

[Woot]

It would be funny if any alliances actually set the rate higher than 0% - it would be bad economic policy so to speak, distorting incentives in a way that simple income taxes don't. Trade is often the most efficient thing to do and specially taxing it would push nations to produce everything themselves and hoard surpluses, because then they would keep a bigger share despite less being produced overall. There's a reason economists have been against this sort of thing since Adam Smith.

 

But if Rose wants to #feeltheBern and go to war with free trade, it would make me very, very happy to see this implemented in the game.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Woot

[Keegoz]

It would be funny if any alliances actually set the rate higher than 0% - it would be bad economic policy so to speak, distorting incentives in a way that simple income taxes don't. Trade is often the most efficient thing to do and specially taxing it would push nations to produce everything themselves and hoard surpluses, because then they would keep a bigger share despite less being produced overall. There's a reason economists have been against this sort of thing since Adam Smith.

 

But if Rose wants to #feeltheBern and go to war with free trade, it would make me very, very happy to see this implemented in the game.

Eh, you could make it that it wouldn't apply to the internal market of the alliance. Thus encouraging to trade within the alliance instead of outside it.

 

I feel like you just wanted to make a snarky comment more than anything else though. This game isn't realistic stop acting like it is.

[Shadowstar1922]

Eh, you could make it that it wouldn't apply to the internal market of the alliance. Thus encouraging to trade within the alliance instead of outside it.

 

I feel like you just wanted to make a snarky comment more than anything else though. This game isn't realistic stop acting like it is.

I'd like to add that tariffs on the international market would be good. alliances could have tariffs for export and imports or the international market and could set them in market shares. this would promote people to focus on selling their resources in markets between alliances so resources can stay in friendly alliances rather then give random strangers your resources. 

[Woot]

I'd like to add that tariffs on the international market would be good. alliances could have tariffs for export and imports or the international market and could set them in market shares. this would promote people to focus on selling their resources in markets between alliances so resources can stay in friendly alliances rather then give random strangers your resources. 

 

Instead of talking about isolating individual nations from the world market now we're talking about isolating a group of 10 or 100, the problem is lessened but still there. And you don't give random strangers your resources, you exchange them for something equally valuable and more useful to you, it's not some sort of drain.

 

But I'm not saying it's a bad game suggestion, even though I think there's a right answer it's still an interesting choice to make and I bet a lot of people would diverge on it.

 

This game isn't realistic stop acting like it is.

 

Do you think economics is less applicable to simple games with rigid rules than it is to real life? P&W has nations making tradeoffs to produce different resources with different inputs and trading them on a market. It's exactly the kind of system you would invent as an example in an intro econ book to explain trade.

[Eric]

I think that you could put tariffs on the market. For example, say if Rose and Mensa go to war again. Rose could put an alliance tariff on all alliances in the Mensa sphere of influence, so that when any Rose members trade with Mensan members, they would have to pay 10% more to the alliance. Makes money and discourages trading with enemies.

 

Although a setback could be higher trade market prices as neutrals might raise their prices knowing that the world is filled with tariffs.

[Shadowstar1922]

I think that you could put tariffs on the market. For example, say if Rose and Mensa go to war again. Rose could put an alliance tariff on all alliances in the Mensa sphere of influence, so that when any Rose members trade with Mensan members, they would have to pay 10% more to the alliance. Makes money and discourages trading with enemies.

 

Although a setback could be higher trade market prices as neutrals might raise their prices knowing that the world is filled with tariffs.

i think that if prices rise then people could be making more money from resource production. 

[Abu Haddad]

This is the best idea in a long time

[Dr Rush]

If this was one of those things that only effected one alliance, I'd say go for it, more places for people to make bad choices is a good idea. However this is one of those things where one person making a poor decisions makes things worse for everyone else.