Country Economy's

@crafty,
i'm trying to figure out at what point can i build more corps. but even the average of my education index is over 200, i still have unemployed teachers of over 50k of them. weird? why didn't these teachers go take jobs in my corps that are not yet 100% employed? do i have to hold their hands to take them to those corps?

my employment index is at 94 and business index at 90, so how can i connect these two?

well, to me is having negative cashflow is just bad. i took a loan and only given me positive cash a few earth days, so i figure my settings somewhere must be wrong. but i just can't find that wrong, as i have mentioned that i'm not going to more negative or to more positive on the cash scale. this make it difficult to fix the problem or find the problem.

my goal from the start was to generate say at least 1T a month in cashflow....i'm so far from that goal, for many weeks now.

@keto,
thank you.
i was trying to follow wildeyes guides of running my own nation. i'm testing whether i can run my own nation with my own corps. perhaps when i got more nations, i will let ceo to come in.

on military, i have dismantle units and deactive many of them weapons and ammos. i figure i put them in storage. selling them is not an option, as i find it too difficult to get them on the market when i need them. so even if i storage them away, the still cost me to keep them clean?

i shall play with the tax rate as you suggested.

thanks

@xiong, even when deactivated or in a space center, they cost your country money.
May I suggest you sell your defensive weapons since you are a single country in secured mode.

What are your government salaries versus corporate salaries?
What are your education priorities set at for each worker group?
What are your buy/sell strategies for corporations?

@keto,
would like to keep all my military stuffs, since the plan is to expand. hard to get them when you need them, as they not available on the world market.

government salaries are auto set target 200, what should it be? should be 80% of corp salaries that i read somewhere, so how do i compare these two and change?

buy/sell strategies were previously on automatic, but i'm finding that corps are not ordering supplies, so i went into those corps with low production and hiring to manually order the supplies. i lef those at are at least 100% already alone

my education priority seem to be changing from the sum of 120 that i previously set. certain days i check and it's 121, 123, 118, and so on. i posted elsewhere that why these are changing, and that i have to reset so often. it would be nice if this forum allow to post image so you can see better. for each category, i was trying to reach the "needed for 100% production" but why is that i still have so many in the "unemployed"...

for example i have lowlevel manager graduated last month of 6585, unemployed of 54650, needed for 100% production of 66094, and current priority of 4. why did my unemployed workers go to employed so that i reach the 100% needed?

Low Level Manager 6,585 54,650 66,094 4


how do i post my spreadsheet here for you to see?

i was wondering why are my soldiers and officers paid so little, 12000 and 32000?

if i'm the president, will i ever be allow to change the salaries of my government employees as well as government owned corps?

really, it seems that the priority of this game is war, but why paid those in military so low? much much lower than the executives?

would make bit more sense to me if my officer makes at least that of the high tech executives (160k) and soldiers/cadets at least to that of the executives (120k), as they are putting their lives on the line for the country.

You have to sort out your numbers needed for 100% production/hiring.

This must be your No.1 priority now. Be glad you dont pay your army more.

Departments > all indexes is where you will see the percentage of corporate salaries you are paying your Govt. workers. Keep it just above 75%. You change Govt. salaries under the departments > labour tab.

If 4 is your LLM ed priority then it is probably too low.

@crafty,
that is the confusing part, since i have 54,650 unemployed while i only need 66,094 for 100% production. why would those unemployed go to be employed, so my deficiency would only be the difference of 11,444? and with my graduation rate of 6,585 per month then i would get to that 100% within 2 months?

another example is i have 12,669 high tech executives who are unemployed while i only needed 4,068 to be 100% production? do i over produce high tech executives in this case, and not enough positions for them?

just these two examples, contradict each other. so i'm not sure which way is to go?

please explain these to me?

thank you

corporations welfare index = 111.10
general salary index = 145.00
government salary index = 72.50

do mean to say that my government salary index to be at least 75% or more?

if so i have set the salary target = 80.0 awhile ago.

@xiong with the numbers needed for 100% production you say 'have 54,650 unemployed while i only need 66,094 for 100% production' i think you would find that another group of workers/profesionals is in short supply.
For example if your are in short of low level workers needed for 100% production however all the other profesions are all there (for 100% production) then that is your problem.
as there is no need to have all the managers and executives working if there is not enough of the low level workers.
Hope that makes sense... Vets please correct me if am am wrong.

@arbuckle,
the table simply is confusing to me, with inadequate information or contradicting information.

as i have posted above, why do i have unemploy lowlevel managers when i have not reach the maximum for 100% production yet? do have too many people in this group and not enough positions for them, or do i not have enough of them?

how can you tell which groups are short (not enough workers)? base on that managing priority table?

base on the same date that i pulled the figures above, i had 40,488 unemployed lowlevel workers, needed 318,899 for 100% production, and have none graduated last month.

on the other hand,
for the teachers, i have no figures for the "needed for 100% production" so i cannot make a guess as to whether i have too many or too little, since i have 27,243 umployed teachers and graduate last month of 4,546. my education index is very high at 195.06, so am i producing too many teachers and not enough schools for them to teach?

i'm guessing that my shortcoming is i don't have enough population, so i am trying to increase the quality of the people through education so they can work in high tech industries. i have posted elsewhere that i have seen that in many wealthy countries, the presidents seem to focus mostly on high tech corps and service corps.

besides these confusing items, my cash keep on flexing up to over 1T and then back down to as low as 200B, on the negative side (negative cashflow).

i'm beginning to confuse myself now too, as i have played with several variables yet not much changes in the last several months.

and the weird thing is my education priorities should not be changing automatically too.

when i set for corps to automatically order supplies, some of them don't order so have not supplies to produce their products, and seems that some of them do order. so i had to manually order supplies for those that don't order, just so these corps can make productions. on this, it's hard to imagine if a president has to manually order all supplies for all his corps in all his countries

hmmm ill try explain it a bit differently.
The first figure is unemployed and the second figure is the amount needed for 100% production...
LLW 30000 25000
MLW 25000 15000
HLW 15000 10000
LLM 10000 8000
MLM 7000 10000
HLM 5000 2500
Exec 1000 200
HTE 20000 10000
HTS 15000 8000
HTex 5000 500
now as you can see there are plenty of workers to produce at 100% however are short of medium level managers due to my military. Now the reason (i believe), that the other profesions are now unemployed is pretty simple. as there are not enough MLM to staff the corps at 100% there is no reason to staff the other profesions.
Just like if at McDonalds, If there were no mid managers to oversee the staff, there would be no jobs for staff as there would be no job for the store manager, as he has no managers to oversee the staff... Store manager loses his job as do the staff. Hope that makes sense

Thats exactly how it works. +1 Lord Arbuckle.

If there is a shortage of ANY worker type then the corps will lay off the corresponding percentage of ALL worker types. The lowest paid corps generally lose first, then its sort of random which corp suffers next.

Xiong you have had this explained to you before.

Also, your Govt. salaries should be at least 75% of your corp salaries. You say your corp salaries average at 145, then what is 75% of that, 72.50? No, closer to 110.

Every country that keeps a decent Govt salary has excess of nurses and teachers. Not just you, there's nothing wrong with that, in fact they are ideal for turning into LLW, MLW and HLW when you need. Up your Govt. salaries before you start losing schools and hospitals due to no staff. I know you are going to argue you have excess teachers and nurses but trust me, you soon wont when you sort out your worker shortages.

@arbuckle,
thanks for that, bit more clear. with yours, does it make sense not to hire any worker below the MLM if there are not sufficient MLM? if this is a rule in the game, the perhaps we need to know what is the min and max that a MLM can manage those below him/her? to simply let us guess, such as of now, is very inefficient to run a country.

so how would you go about balance your insufficient MLM? and in your case, if you fix the MLM will your other categories be all fixed since you have plenty? though it still don't make sense, unless after you fix the MLM and you got only 5000 unemployed LLW. or the difference between 100% and unemployed figures, as the new unemployed figures, in all your categories.

@crafty,
i did set my government salary target to be 80% of corp salary, but i'm not sure why it does not get there at its 5% increment yet.

it seems to remain that this about 50% difference.

as of today (now), these figures are general salary index of 199.85 and government salary index of 99.92

perhaps you may have mentioned to me eleswhere, but i just haven't figure how to decifer your explanation. but please do again if you can

xiong, are you a free member?
On the automation page, make sure the first 8 boxes are un-checked. If they all have check marks in them, then the GM is adjusting those settings for you.
Also, close Factory Roads and Rommey Universites corporations and maybe one of the stone corps. That will help your shortage of workers issue.
I see your corps are 200 salary then make your government salaries 175.

Yeah, I think your getting the govt salaries confused with the govt salary index. As keto says, corp salary = 200 then govt = 175, actually I would make it 155, so that works out at govt salaries being 87.5% in Ketos scenario or 77.5% in mine, just keep it slightly higher than 75% for the best savings. Of course you can pay more and it should increase your welfare marginally, but lower costs are better for you right now. So you see the difference? your govt salary index is now higher than need be at 99.92, lower the govt salaries a bit to get 75 - 80 index.

But anyways, like Keto and I said, keep closing the duff corps until you get your 100% hiring across the whole board, its better to have one less corp with all producing at 100% than one more with all producing at less than optimal.

@keto,
thank you for that. i shall try your suggestions. it says make no sense to close the stone corp, but i have closed the other two. to get gov't salary to be 80 then my corp salary to be 100?

i'm just waiting to get to positive cashflow to go premium. i thought there's no much difference between the two types.

@crafty,
you're meaning to say that paying salary at 200 is too much for my workers? which drives my gov't cost to be too high at above 80?

i have a limited number of population, i was hoping to get quality out of them. that's one of the reasons to pay them very high, give them the most education, and so on. i'm seeing that the programming of the game does not really follow this logical route. especially as arbuckle pointed out earlier that if i don't have a manager then no workers below that manager will be hired? this kind of logic does not jive with me, as on earth we have hired many workers before we hired the supervisor or manager to oversee those workers and most often is that the supervisor/manager come out thru the rank of the workers, rather than taken from outside that line.

xiong, listen to what crafty said. Try those settings and remember it will take a few real days for the effects to show.

i was wondering why the logic is that government workers should have lower salary than the salaries of the corps' workers. if the game is to be played this way, then surely it should allow us players to give other benefits to the government workers, but are we allowed to give the gov't workers more time off, better health care, better incentives to be a gov't workers.

it seems to be that the priority is to give the best of the best workers to the corps, while the government takes the second/third class of workers?

this ideology then will certain make government expenses to the country rather than revenues?

why mess with just few chosen variables, which cause an unbalance in the running of the country? by that i meant simply why not let the president/player do everything, istead of having the gm to interferre with everything. i wonder if GOD automat certain aspects of running the USA gov't?

at this moment the quality of public works like hospitals and schools, are quantitative not qualitative. Having loads of schools and hospitals give you better indexes, not having better schools or hospitals. Also why it's best to buy the lowest quality roads, traintracks, schools, etc, possible. The logic to do what is best in this regard is concrete. If education utilized a community welfare index similiar to corporate welfare index then there would b a variety of of different strategies for sure.

Those aren't the end all be all strategies though. My gov't salaries are probably closer to 50%, but I keep out of shortages through keeping enough workers. With an education level of about 200 or so you should be able to also.

But to defend the idealogical difference you have with the game. Community buildings improve your country, and corporations pay for your country. So if your country gets paid well you probably will compensate those gov't workers. By stregnthening the institutions bringing indexes higher in ed or health. Also corp welfare pays better with higher welfare so as your corps do well their salaries may increase and too balance it so will your gov't workers. So just become a 1st world nation and the problem is gone.

As for weapons I agree you should sell them, shortages on the market are still obtainable, you will just have a problem with the few that you can't keep them if your scared, but if your losing too much money you might want to shed some batteries, tanks, etc. not that I'm very good at the war game, though.

thank you to all those you have provided their times and advises to me. my business index is now above 100

but my cash is still negative, let see what will happen the next few days.

@drew,
not everything is clear in this game.
perhaps because of insufficient information to the rules of the game.

it seems to me that education only seem to be tied to population, and other indexes depend on the education index?

as i play more of this game, i'm seeing why some said this game has a capitalistic nature. it allows you to do something, but not other things. if it is a game of skills, then just set the rules and let players playout their skills. the way it is now, gm always has his/her hands in the game to twig this or that, so it's not really base on the skills of the players. for example, for a chess game, the rules are clear and you know the limits of each piece. in sc, i'm not sure what the rules are, other than to build a great country.

Education, Health, and Transportation are all tied to population. Ed affects what professionals are born and your welfare index, health affects your death rate and your welfare index. Your welfare plays a large part in your production capacity. Salaries is the rest.

So you want to keep that index up and as you grow you want to grow it, which means buying more than what seems neccessary, if your problem is money than the extra production from high indexes won't pay for them, but if you pay them less you can maximize those indexes. Not all indexes should carry the same weight for you. Maximizing production only really cuts 3 things the amount of labor needed, the cost of labor per unit (hopefully), and the proportion of your production that goes to pay fixed costs of the company. So I think what would serve you better is to look at the indexes exclusive of each other and think about what they really mean. Because even if you can afford a social security index of 250 it's affect most likely won't be what you anticipated. You can actually keep really high important indexes by sacrifices some that are less important. for example spending a couple of months overprioritizing education and health labor units and develop a high surplus of them you can cut the gov't salaries and as long as your social security isn't extreme you will save lots of money without the risk of demolished buildings. 1. Isolate, 2. Learn, 3. Conquer

@drew,
i'm still trying to figure the ties between the indexes. i realize these are tied to the population of my country.

i thought that with a small population like mine, about 21M now, if the education is very high then i would be able to put them to high production corps or corps that required skills.

i have not come out of negative cash, and at the rate i'm going, it will take several earth months to come out to positive cash?

maybe i should de-register this country and go start over on FB where everything seems to be better? and where i don't have to compete for resources so much in crowded worlds such as kb?

GR isn't crowded. High education will basically just takes new would be workers and turns them into professionals. High Tech Companies have lower workers/professionals than agriculuture mining food etc. So yeah you are kind of right. This let's you lower the labor costs, but what of your country? There is an exchange you face here. There are also multiple varibles associated with it.

Save on labor costs by increasing the costs to your country. Well then you have to manipulate the things you can control. If you need to cut ed costs by decreasing gov't labor costs. With a superior ed index you can pump out extra professionals to have them from leaving gov't and entering corporate. Maybe you've done that and costs are still too high. Educational income comes from having your citizens have high incomes. You can increase the contribution by the public by simply raising salaries in your corps. This will also increase the contribution to health. Think of that tradeoff, me personally I don't ever think of salaries as costs in regards to country. As long as that money doesn't leave it circulates. So you may find it a decent strategy to keep all your corps "profits" close to 0 but positive, by increasing salaries to this optimum level, it will decrease the loss on ed/health and make great increases to the contribution of the investment funds, ed/health losses, and most importantly income taxes collected by the public. Not to mention if you don't view salaries as an expense you are technically making more money as production per $ spent increases as corporate welfare increases. You should play around with that some when at what level does paying your peopl more stop giving you a benefit? When does the change incontribution from corps change more than the added changes in ed income+health income+tax income? There are a lot of ways to use the information present. That final suggestion not only can speed up your recovery but also make it even more appealing to CEO's that want high welfare indexes. I know I care more about welfare index then i do about the corporate tax rate.

Logic there is sound if the welfare is high enough you will stay out of the red, If taxes are high the green payouts are just lower, but staying out of the red should be proirity uno.

Hope that helps, I'm not sure if I can look at your country as I'm not on KB