It’s been a while since I posted here due to IRL duties, but I am back to once again lobby for capitalism.
I have long had an issue with the Democracy games’ (3 and 4) inability to capture the free market in the algorithms. I understand that it must be incredibly hard to actually put numbers and calculations to the free market, and have it permanently running in the background of the economy.
However, I think it is necessary to have at least some level of capitalism added to the game, even if limited. I am consistently encountering the problem of having to choose between State Control or State Subsidy, there is no option to simply let the free market solve a problem. Why is it that despite a raging Water Crisis, the desalination plants can only be built by me, the government, and not be a savvy and profit-minded capitalist who knows he will make a killing off of selling the water, which leads to others trying, competition, and eventually the water crisis being resolved? Make it unstable, make it volatile, but don’t make it impossible, because this just limits the whole game to a very Keynesian and robotic standpoint.
Additionally, Technology/Automation impacting rates of employment may be legitimate, but there still remain jobs being created to service the new technology and automated systems, and new fields open up over time (how many food couriers existed in 1000ad?) as the free market necessitates it. Surely then, we must have a system for unemployment decay, as the technology fields grow. If nothing else this can simulate the unemployed manual workers retiring/ dying in age, meaning there are now no systemically unemployed, as nobody was raised to work a non-existent job.
Finally, why can there not be a system of legal reform in regards to climate change concerns rather than subsidies and taxes and grants? As in, why can I not introduce a policy of “Pollution Liability” which means that anyone whose property is damaged by pollutants released from someone else’s property/ business can sue and receive compensation and force reform? It would not solve environmental destruction by any means but it limits at least some of the problem without involving the state (outside of the justice system). And why is it not possible for companies to advertise themselves as being environmentalist, planting trees or cutting down emissions, without regulation requiring it? Ethical goods are popular in modern, western markets, and we see companies pitching themselves to be pro-environment all the time and doing publicity stunts for it (publicity stunts that, although selfish, still result in improvement in the environment). Again, this calls for general decay in the pollution rates when in an educated and free economy.
TL:DR, let negatives decay over time because that’s what capitalism does. Let me have free market capitalism, instead of the highest form of functional capitalism in this game which is AT BEST Social Democracy.