Unemployment/Poverty/Crime/Welfare

[Bremen]

My biggest problem with the idea is that Aurora seems to use a simplified economy with elements of both communism and capitalism (the state builds the factories, and seems to pay the workers, but there's also a civilian side economy on the side with civilian shipping). And that's simply because it's much more fun to use an intuitive and simple economic model, while modern day capitalism certainly is neither.

The second is that trying to define the economy just by the player's actions is kind of silly. If a planet can support itself with 20% of the population working service and agriculture jobs while 80% work in the shipyards, it can support itself just as well with 20% of the population working service and agriculture jobs and 80% playing golf. Obviously this is an oversimplification of the situation; it might be better to have a different 20% work each weekday, but the point stands. Trying to model poverty in Aurora would be trying to impose present day issues on a hypothetical situation that has almost nothing in common with the present.

[DuraniumCowboy (OP)]

I am glad to have started an interesting discussion.  Some my initial thoughts were related to Nutall's Empire's Corps book, however the biggest piece was that I was thinking of trying to model a US vs Chinese early race into the stars.  I was trying to grapple with how to model are very large economy, with very serious structural issues like China.  If space really did become race to colonize, how would a country like China balance domestic economic issues with space based colonialism, and how would human space look after a 100 years of that competition against American or Europian interests.  This is a setting I would love to flesh out.

Also, fundamentally, I am a little skeptical of the idea that an abundant future will be a social utopia.  I personally think you already see this now (in America, we are living in abundance).  Less and less folks are needed to produce what is needed, which sounds great until you factor in that the folks with the intellectual/productive jobs that produce the abundance are the equity holders in the new economy, and anybody else basically gets what part of the abundance that trickles down from the equity holders.  I am not saying this from a political, sense, rather that there is going to be a real structural challenge with how future economies could work, and one that I would like to grapple with in my writings.

Anyway, I do agree that something like this would definitely be optional.  I wouldn't want to force anybody into a play style, or writing style, that is not consistent with their vision.

[swarm_sadist]

All TN elements are mined or can be bought by you. Ergo no TN elements are ever going into the civilian sector. So how can household items be made of the stuff?

The civilian mining companies will give you the option to buy their goods, although anything you do not buy ends up (apparently) in the civilian marketplace.

Also, let's look at the tonnages. A full scale factory, of which there are only a thousand or so on a whole planet, needs only one hundred and twenty tonnes of TN elements. As such those elements are almost certainly used in only trace quantities for special hardware used in very special circumstances. The only things that seem to be using TN elements in bulk are vehicles (including missiles). As such civilian economy can very well be a post-scarcity one even if national (and very specialized industries) are not.

Rare earth metals, as well as some platinum group metals such as osmium and iridium are found in very limited quantities on Earth.  In all their applications they are used in minute (grams to micrograms) weight. However, they are so effective in their function that they are highly sought after in both military and civilian applications. It is not so bizarre to think that a material that can defy the laws of newton would not find demand in a civilian marketplace. Sorium by itself would be sought after everywhere.

As far as poverty (due to unemployment) goes my answer is: no. My doubts about balancing the stuff has still not been addressed and as such I continue to believe that such a system would severely limit possible starting conditions. For example, let's say the poverty is balanced for a standard start with five hundred million people and a thousand conventional factories. What happens when I want to start a conventional game with a planet of nine billion people but only one thousand factories? In such a situation I would be crippled due to constant unemployment rate of over twenty percent. Ergo, such a start would not be feasible.

While this is very gamy, I would say that the unemployed people in a highly developed nation (with a well developed service sector) would be able to find work in the service sector with ease. A nation that relies on industry (or worse yet resource extraction) for most of it's GDP would be hard hit from unemployment. A planet with 9 billion people would have a large amount of people outside the TN industry, but there would be plenty of people in the wealth and trade menu making trade goods.

In any case, wealth does not do enough in game so 50% unemployment would not affect the nation in a noticeable way. Maybe if there was social assistance or entertainment funds (like Masters of Orion) that improves happiness, or any government expenditures.

[Haji]

The civilian mining companies will give you the option to buy their goods, although anything you do not buy ends up (apparently) in the civilian marketplace.

But that's kinda the point - you have an option to buy all the TN elements depriving the civilian sectors of them. But whether or not any TN minerals end up in civilian hands the money generation (per capita income) is the same. Which means that the civilian sector is not using TN elements.

Rare earth metals, as well as some platinum group metals such as osmium and iridium are found in very limited quantities on Earth.  In all their applications they are used in minute (grams to micrograms) weight. However, they are so effective in their function that they are highly sought after in both military and civilian applications. It is not so bizarre to think that a material that can defy the laws of newton would not find demand in a civilian marketplace. Sorium by itself would be sought after everywhere.

But that was kinda my point. A small recap: The original poster wants to implement the unemployment mechanic. Someone points out that the societies in Aurora are post-scarcity. This is countered by claiming that TN elements make the economy a scarcity based one.

What I tried to do was to point out that TN elements are being used only in very specific industries, relating mainly to military and space travel. However the larger civilian economy is either not using them (which was the first point, about being able to deprive civilians of TN minerals) or using them in such a small amounts that the scarcity is artificial. And if the elements were being used in "minute (grams to micrograms) weight" then having planets with millions of tonnes of them, coupled with recycling, would remove the scarcity. Ergo, existence of TN elements does not prevent societies in Aurora from being post-scarcity ones.

While this is very gamy, I would say that the unemployed people in a highly developed nation (with a well developed service sector) would be able to find work in the service sector with ease. A nation that relies on industry (or worse yet resource extraction) for most of it's GDP would be hard hit from unemployment. A planet with 9 billion people would have a large amount of people outside the TN industry, but there would be plenty of people in the wealth and trade menu making trade goods.

But that's the thing - Aurora is already simulating that. Currently all people on a planet are part of one of three industries.

Agriculture and Environmental - feeds and houses people. The percentage of people employed in this sector increases with colony cost of a planet. For Earth it's five percent. For a planet with colony cost 2.0 it's 15%. The only exception are orbital habitats which have 0% dedicated to this sector.
Services Industries - The self-regulating, self-supplying civilian sector such as banking, household goods manufacturing, transport, entertainment and other services. The percentage of people employed in this sector rises with the population size and caps at 75% (I don't remember at which point).
Manufacturing - People employed by you or not employed at all. This is the least important part of the economy and as such only people who are not employed in the previous two go here. That means it's entirely possible to have a planet with no one working in manufacturing (for example a large planet with colony cost 5.0 would have well over 25% people in agriculture, the rest in services and no one in manufacturing).

All of the above means that on a well developed, habitable planet you'll have 20% people who are employed by either you or not at all. Which means the larger the population, the more difficult it will be to provide enough buildings/complexes to find them work and more of the new, proposed social structures to appease the poor. Which means that the larger the population, the less viable it will be. Which is why I'm saying that it has to be balanced and why I'm saying that no one is addressing this problem.

This also means that non-habitable planets produce less poverty as larger numbers of people are automatically employed in agriculture and services. Which is counter-intuitive as running infrastructure (keeping everyone alive in a hostile environment) should cost money.

In any case, wealth does not do enough in game so 50% unemployment would not affect the nation in a noticeable way. Maybe if there was social assistance or entertainment funds (like Masters of Orion) that improves happiness, or any government expenditures.

I don't know about you but I'm running into red in my games quite often, even with relatively large populations (over two and a half billion people). As such I'm in no hurry to add more money sinks.

[swarm_sadist]

But that's kinda the point - you have an option to buy all the TN elements depriving the civilian sectors of them. But whether or not any TN minerals end up in civilian hands the money generation (per capita income) is the same. Which means that the civilian sector is not using TN elements.

That's a problem with per capita income, and does not mean that civilians aren't using TN resources. Also, buying TN resources is more expensive than simply taxing the civilian extraction. +150 compared to -250 I believe.

But that was kinda my point. A small recap: The original poster wants to implement the unemployment mechanic. Someone points out that the societies in Aurora are post-scarcity. This is countered by claiming that TN elements make the economy a scarcity based one.

Except currently civilian ships just "spawn" without any resources. The civilian sector is not using TN resources because the game does not track civilian TN resources. It doesn't mean that civilians would not have a use for large scale applications of TN resources.

What I tried to do was to point out that TN elements are being used only in very specific industries, relating mainly to military and space travel. However the larger civilian economy is either not using them (which was the first point, about being able to deprive civilians of TN minerals) or using them in such a small amounts that the scarcity is artificial. And if the elements were being used in "minute (grams to micrograms) weight" then having planets with millions of tonnes of them, coupled with recycling, would remove the scarcity. Ergo, existence of TN elements does not prevent societies in Aurora from being post-scarcity ones.

Again, there being no consequences to starving a civilian market of TN resources is because there is no mechanic to simulate this. My suggestion was adding a consequence. Also, rare earth metals are used in minute sizes in EVERYTHING, requiring several thousands of tonnes to be processed and used every year by perhaps only half of the planets current population. Having a material that defies the laws of physics would be sought after in everything.

But that's the thing - Aurora is already simulating that. Currently all people on a planet are part of one of three industries.

Agriculture and Environmental - feeds and houses people. The percentage of people employed in this sector increases with colony cost of a planet. For Earth it's five percent. For a planet with colony cost 2.0 it's 15%. The only exception are orbital habitats which have 0% dedicated to this sector.
Services Industries - The self-regulating, self-supplying civilian sector such as banking, household goods manufacturing, transport, entertainment and other services. The percentage of people employed in this sector rises with the population size and caps at 75% (I don't remember at which point).
Manufacturing - People employed by you or not employed at all. This is the least important part of the economy and as such only people who are not employed in the previous two go here. That means it's entirely possible to have a planet with no one working in manufacturing (for example a large planet with colony cost 5.0 would have well over 25% people in agriculture, the rest in services and no one in manufacturing).

20% of the population free for manufacturing is not the same as 20% unemployment. Also, a single "factory" employs millions of people, and that is just the TN factories. There are still factories that are (implied) making trade goods and regular conventional goods.

All of the above means that on a well developed, habitable planet you'll have 20% people who are employed by either you or not at all. Which means the larger the population, the more difficult it will be to provide enough buildings/complexes to find them work and more of the new, proposed social structures to appease the poor. Which means that the larger the population, the less viable it will be. Which is why I'm saying that it has to be balanced and why I'm saying that no one is addressing this problem.

Well uncapping the service industry or have conventional factories pop up and pump out trade goods would be one suggestion to fix this problem. There is no solution to this problem, because this problem does not exist in the current game, ergo, no reason to have a fix for this problem.

This also means that non-habitable planets produce less poverty as larger numbers of people are automatically employed in agriculture and services. Which is counter-intuitive as running infrastructure (keeping everyone alive in a hostile environment) should cost money.

Good suggestion, have undeveloped colonies cost wealth. Just because it's not in the game, doesn't mean it will never be.

I don't know about you but I'm running into red in my games quite often, even with relatively large populations (over two and a half billion people). As such I'm in no hurry to add more money sinks.

I've found that research is the primary money sink for me, with ship construction and facility construction being far behind. Everything else is basically non-existent. If I run into financial trouble, I just leave a couple of research labs idle until I'm a billion in the green.