Suggestions for Democracy 3

Celebi
Junior Line Supervisor
Junior Line Supervisor
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 11:06 am

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby Celebi » Thu May 02, 2013 6:28 pm

There should be posibillity of modding government control of industry/railroads etc. For example: player invest in building state hospitals a then changes aproach to more market-friendly and privatize the hospitals, which apart from negative a positive effects of weakening government healthcare system, would also result in short-term boost in revenues from privatisations. In democracy 2 this is almost impossible to mod.
Medhue
Junior Line Worker
Junior Line Worker
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 7:40 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby Medhue » Mon May 27, 2013 8:17 pm

Definitely a neat game. Kudos to the creators!

I spent some time playing the game and I like how it all works. I have to say tho, I was a bit disappointed by the very leftist stance it all has. I understand that the name of the game is Democracy, which is leftist, and not a republic, which is what the US is supposed to be. Now, I didn't come here to argue about political theory really, but I do wonder if the developers have ever heard of the Austrian theory of economics? I'm a libertarian, and we promote unregulated markets, and show how centralized highly regulated markets have unintended consequences that hurt the very people the regulations are said to help. When you combine free markets with property rights, freedom of speech, and common law, a nation has pretty much every it needs to make it's people prosper and protect their interests. The basic premise from a libertarian's view is that the state uses force to enact their rules, which makes them invalid, and less affective. When people always engage in voluntary acts, it results in better actual solutions, rather than beating people or throwing them in a cage. I would just like to see voluntary policy proposals in the mix. Like Neighborhood Watches, or Community funded homeless shelters, or community drug intervention program, or any voluntary solution for social problems. Pollution in game is a big factor, but the only reason we have all these pollution problems is because the government relaxes and limits liability for damages. If a factory is polluting the water, and people are getting sick down stream, that company should be sued out of existence, but the government steps in and protects the factory. Same goes for air pollution. This stuff isn't expressed in the game.

Again, I think you guys have created a well functioning game, and I do well in the game if I accept the leftist slant of everything. I just won't be buying any other versions, as I don't want to promote the ideology of the game. I'd love to see a more liberty minded version of the game tho.

Hey, and if you do make something like I suggest, and you need an animator in latter more animated versions, give me a shout.

Medhue at Medhue Animations
User avatar
jeffryfisher
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby jeffryfisher » Tue May 28, 2013 7:56 pm

Medhue wrote:I was a bit disappointed by the very leftist stance it all has...

I don't think that D2's slant was so much "leftist" as it was "statist" (look at drug and immigration sims), and I don't think it was deliberate. Rather, I think it is the natural result of thinking in a policy-making box (when you carry a gov't hammer, every problem in society looks like a public-policy nail).

Cliff has already stated that there will be more non-governmental objects in D3 to pick up the slack if/when state-run analogs (like gov't hospitals) are absent. I am hopeful that libertarians like us can opt to set a stage for those non-governmental organs to prosper. Whether or not that tactic brings more prosperity will depend on what numbers are fed into the simulations. Since we can mod the game, we can tweak the numbers to reflect whatever statistics we trust (and we will be able to heap unintended consequences on statist policies).

When you combine free markets with property rights, freedom of speech, and common law, a nation has pretty much everything it needs to make it's people prosper and protect their interests.

A government does need to provide a modicum of public services to support those. For instance, in addition to property *rights*, it is essential to carefully record property title and facilitate transfers. Registered property becomes *fungible*, which gives capitalists good collateral to use in financing real investment in new plant and equipment. Thomas Sowell covers several such essential roles of government in one chapter of "Basic Economics". Every libertarian should read it to remind him/herself why we're not anarchists.

When people always engage in voluntary acts, it results in better actual solutions

True in many cases, but not all. Exceptions include "tragedy of the commons" (aka race to the bottom) and many activities with external costs.

I would just like to see voluntary policy proposals in the mix.

Likewise, I hope to see some in-between policies that use finesse rather than brute-force and gov't ownership. These policies wouldn't be purely voluntary, but they would use the least gov't involvement possible to effect some consensus goal. For example, what if scholarship tax credits were used to achieve universal education without gov't virtually monopolizing the ownership and administration of schools (along with state control over curriculum and reading lists)?


Pollution in game is a big factor, but the only reason we have all these pollution problems is because the government relaxes and limits liability for damages. If a factory is polluting the water, and people are getting sick down stream, that company should be sued out of existence... Same goes for air pollution.

I've seen this line of reasoning in the past, and it doesn't quite wash. There's a concentrated-profit versus diffuse damages problem here. There are transactional costs and threshold barriers inhibiting the many slightly-injured from effectively suing the highly-profitable one. Look at how lawyers eat the bulk of the proceeds from big class-action suits, and you see how this litigious alternative to direct gov't regulation is uneconomical. Therefore, in certain situations of broad, diffuse harm or benefit, gov't can and should intervene to attach a price to the harm or buy the benefit. This is the original meaning of "general welfare": instituting something that has widespread, not privileged benefit.

I just won't be buying any other versions, as I don't want to promote the ideology of the game. I'd love to see a more liberty minded version of the game tho.

Don't give up yet. Keep exploring the forums, and read up on "modding". Much of the game can be extended or designed. You'd probably love my version's tax credits for K-12 scholarships, public health, subsistence-level housing/food, and much more. I'm waiting for D3 before doing any more work. If I have time available when D3 comes out, I hope to re-work my ideas into the new game.
Jon
Senior Line Worker
Senior Line Worker
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby Jon » Fri May 31, 2013 2:29 pm

Do you think it would be possible to include public service reform as another lever that can be used in addition to or as an alternative to altering spending levels? Private/public sector partnership in the Health Service, independently run state schools (academies) etc. etc.?
User avatar
jeffryfisher
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby jeffryfisher » Fri May 31, 2013 9:44 pm

Jon wrote:Do you think it would be possible to include public service reform as another lever that can be used in addition to or as an alternative to altering spending levels? Private/public sector partnership in the Health Service, independently run state schools (academies) etc. etc.?

By public service, do you mean that citizens pay with time served rather than with money)? In the US, the amendment banning involuntary servitude might get in the way.
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7975
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby cliffski » Fri May 31, 2013 10:16 pm

There is a policy in democracy 3 for school vouchers, which is basically the government taxing people, and then giving people a voucher for each child that is then spent on private sector schools. I might introduce a similar system for health. It's like a middle ground between pure free market (private schools, which is new for D3) and state provided health care.
D3 definitely has more support for private sector focused policies.
User avatar
jeffryfisher
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby jeffryfisher » Sun Jun 02, 2013 5:55 pm

cliffski wrote:There is a policy in democracy 3 for school vouchers, which is basically the government taxing people, and then giving people a voucher for each child that is then spent on private sector schools.

That should suffice, even though politicians tend to feel ownership over money that passes through their hands, inducing too many of them to attach meddlesome conditions. Still, a voucher policy targets the public interest in guaranteeing literacy / numeracy to all children, leaving most planning and choosing to citizen freedom. In particular, we can posit that gov't gives up its power over curriculum and required/banned reading.

In democratic societies where we would be up in arms against any gov't that dared dictate news editorial policy, how did we ever come to tolerate supposedly liberal gov'ts dictating what "truth" to pump into our kids' heads? It must be that if we all grow up immersed in something from a young, impressionable age, then most of us never think to question it. This epiphany gives me some insight into the how and why of America's ante-bellum acceptance of slavery.

BTW, this gives me another thought for D3: Historic starting dates with different social norms and policies. Imagine a game starting with slavery being common practice and radicals proposing to abolish it. In the UK, you could deal with Corn Laws and Imperialism.

Of course, as long as the modding flexibility is goes far enough, then players can design those scenarios. Just having that dimension in mind during game design should lead to that flexibility... and maybe a collection of avatars in Victorian-era costumes to support it.
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7975
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby cliffski » Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:31 am

Yeah Victorian or medieval mos would be awesome :D
Jon
Senior Line Worker
Senior Line Worker
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby Jon » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:02 pm

Cliffski, that sounds excellent. But I think for countries like Britain it would be really good if there could be still more nuance. As I'm sure you know, the big trend started by the Blair government and continued with modifications by the current one is to 'break down the monolith' of public services (if you're an American, I mean things like state schools and the NHS). There are now large numbers of state schools run independently by private organizations who do not turn a profit but have much greater independence than normal state schools (a bit like Charter Schools). There is a similar phenomenon in the NHS with foundation hospitals, and there is also the ever increasing amount of private-public partnership, where the NHS contracts out services to the private sector which are still provided free at the point of use but not directly by the public sector. The thing I'm pressing towards is the idea of a middle position between traditional socialized services and fully privatized services, a system which seems to be the way Britain is going. Advantages are big increase in quality while retaining universal provision free at point of use, disadvantages are anger of unions (voter group would presumably be 'state employees') and socialists, along with capitalists who want to go further to full privatisation. Is this too detailed to model?
Jon
Senior Line Worker
Senior Line Worker
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby Jon » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:10 pm

I'd imagine that you'd have a sliding scale: Fully state-provided system | Private-public partnership free at point of use | Private system with vouchers (or insurance in case of health service) for those in need | Fully private system.

Of course the two middle positions do functionally have a lot in common, but the cultural differences between Britain and America are big - in Britain we are big believers in public services free at the point of use for all, in Americ the state seems to be built along different lines. The big difference between the two options is whether the services are free for all at the point of use.
User avatar
jeffryfisher
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby jeffryfisher » Fri Jun 07, 2013 12:31 am

Jon wrote:The big difference between the two options is whether the services are free for all at the point of use.

Free at point of use (where consumption decisions are made) will have the side effect that "nothing is too good for the patient" (or student or whatever). Consumption of goods and/or services explodes. Alarmed by budget-busting costs, legislators tend to push back with "protocols" and other rules that take treatment choices out of the hands of patients and doctors. That way leads to supposed "death panels" that decide who deserves treatment.

I'd rather... well it doesn't matter what I'd like. All that matters is that the policies be implemented with side-effects in tow. If Cliff really wants to showcase something like socialized medicine, then he can offer multiple layers of the onion as separate policies, each successive policy attempting to correct the side-effects of the one before it.
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7975
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby cliffski » Fri Jun 07, 2013 10:25 pm

Actually this raises some interesting issues regarding private or public health provision. The current (very abstracted) assumption is that they both provide the same sort of service, other than with private provision there are people on very low incomes who are getting worse outcomes (because it's assumed that they just can't afford any treatment). What you remind me of, is the fact that there is likely to be more emphasis on prevention (and perhaps thus in theory lower overall costs) with free at the point of use care, because people are more likely to see doctor at an earlier stage. This is definitely the casein the UK, from my own experience.
But then... you could make many arguments in either direction. Maybe knowing the state health service picks up the pieces makes us more likely to behave in self-destructive ways? Is there a mindset that says "I'm going to eat healthily because no way can I afford to be ill". Is that really a thing?
User avatar
jeffryfisher
Type III Robot
Type III Robot
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby jeffryfisher » Sat Jun 08, 2013 12:02 am

cliffski wrote:Actually this raises some interesting issues regarding private or public health provision... there is likely to be more emphasis on prevention (and perhaps thus in theory lower overall costs) with free at the point of use care


There seems to be more "preventative" care when care is subsidized or free. However, that has not translated into lower total cost. Given a choice between a $1000 MRI and a $100 X-ray, the patient and doctor always opt for the $1000 MRI when the gov't is paying.

because people are more likely to see doctor at an earlier stage.


This is one horn of the public health-care dilemma. The other is that we want to somehow protect people against life-changing ruinous cost of catastrophe without providing mundane care that everyone expects to encounter. However, as you indicate, many mundane services can head off the catastrophes.

Maybe knowing the state health service picks up the pieces makes us more likely to behave in self-destructive ways?

In the US, knowing that no hospital can refuse emergency care leads the poor (and illegal aliens) to seek emergency-room treatment for mundane conditions. This is driving hospitals out of business, especially along the Mexican border. Border states are trying to pass laws to protect themselves before their last hospitals close, but the federal gov't is shooting down the laws. The day may come very soon that US citizens in Arizona will need to go to Nevada to find a hospital.
Jon
Senior Line Worker
Senior Line Worker
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby Jon » Sun Jun 09, 2013 11:08 am

Cliffski - you've got it. The aim of governments in recent years has been to try and harness the efficiency of the private sector while maintaining the essence of a free at the point of use service. There are other aspects to health reform that I'd love to see, such as how in Britain we are slowly moving from lots of hospitals to fewer numbers which can specialize in certain areas of treatment. (There is currently a debate going on in the newspapers about whether GPs should open surgeries at weekends.) Public service reforms have generally improved the service - the main problem with implementing them in the game should not be in outcomes but in public opinion - unions, socialists and some whose local hospital is closing etc etc are against reform. I think implementing public service reform in education (academies), benefits (Universal Credit) etc would be really good too - reforming public services has been the main domestic priority of successive governments.
peadar1987
Junior Line Worker
Junior Line Worker
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:28 pm

Re: Suggestions for Democracy 3

Postby peadar1987 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:41 pm

Could I add my support to the suggestion that you can play in opposition and form coalitions?

Countries could have an attribute that determines how likely they are to have vote split between numerous parties (which would model such things as first-past-the-post voting versus PR, and historical factors. The US would score very low, the Netherlands extremely high, and the UK somewhere in between, for example).

You would then have to negotiate to form a coalition, each party would have a manifesto, and a share of the vote, which would weight how demanding they are. You make promises to concede certain issues to them to earn political capital from their ministers. If you break your promises or take the country in a direction they really don't like, any party can pull the plug on the coalition, leaving you either with fresh negotiations, or a new election.

As a minor partner in a coalition, you'd be working from the other side, you make demands. Go too soft and you'll anger your core voters, be too bullish, and you don't get into government at all.

Whatever gets in, I'm sure the new game will be just as great as the old one, I can't wait for it to be released!

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests