Democracy 3 Simulations (statistics, policies & situations)

In order to encourage the development of, and achieve the most optimal Democracy 3 simulations a topic to encourage people to contribute ideas on its development needs to be created.

I propose a healthy communities statistic

Socio-economic measures like household income, employment rates affect mortality rates and prevalence of certain diseases and this is well simulated in Democracy 2 through the lifespan statistics.

Ecological measures like social capital, community cohesion, trust, security, the built environment and the services and institutions available do exist like the air quality statistics but are much less developed.

Community health is related to population concepts and therefore must include

Illness and disease and the community experience with disease and death indicates the degree to which a community is or is not healthy.

income affects an individuals health through their ability to pay for housing, food, clothing and other items. As well the differences in income distribution between the richest and poorest impacts people at the lower end of the level by decreasing control and providing fewer choices in their lives.

Social networks individuals have through relationships with family and/or friends for support and comfort and by having others to rely on in times of difficulties and by having relationships through which celebrations and achievements can be shared, individuals are healthier and happier.

Education gives individuals knowledge and skills that provides access to information one may need to make healthy choices and access job opportunities.

Employment allows individuals to earn an income and have built-in relationships and they also feel they are contributing to society.

Environment through clean air and water and city/town infrastructure that enables safe houses, communities, workplaces and roads, all contribute to good health.

interesting ideas, and I can see how such measures could be incorporated into a future version of the game. We have a policy here in the UK where you can send your children to a school that’s a huge distance away. As well as all the other effects (traffic congestion etc) that this has, it also, as far as I can see, reduces community cohesion because kids no longer live in the same street as their school friends, and parents no longer act as a local community.
It would be great to model all kinds of ‘soft’ stats for this kind of thing.

Is this for general discussion of Democracy 3? Because if so, I’d like to see more involvement from your ministers in terms of favored specific policies, periodic advice, and points given to you for following their suggestions (to weigh against points lost by taking opposing actions).

I’d also like to see a small range of dirty tricks that one could employ to discredit a particular side of an issue, which would in turn involve hiring individuals to spin issues for the press, plant false evidence, etc.

Have you considered enhancing the macro-economic features by incorporating a circular flow of income model into democracy 3, with withdrawals and injections from the household and firm sector.

• Household sector consisting of productive factors that earn income

• Firm sector that produces goods and services and pays income

• Finance sector that collects savings and makes investments

• Government sector that collects taxation and allocates expenditure

• Overseas sector that is involved in import and export

If you incorporated this model into Democracy 3 you could have a current account, capital account, interest rates, business investment, inflation, national savings, foreign investment and real GDP per capita maybe even capital and exchange controls.

I have no idea whether this is all feasible it might make the game too confusing but I thought I’d mention it.

The game is very challenging and stimulating after you win your first election and are in your first term, but after winning your second election your second term becomes much less challenging.

The game dynamics seem to be based on a complicated version of the economic model known as the circular flow of income but it only has one leakage, which is the government sector it lacks two other leakages the financial sector and the overseas sector.

Since the game has turns and elections I was wondering if a financial sector leakage could be included after winning your second election, and at the beginning of your second term with corresponding policies added into the game and a new debt ceiling worked out by the AI that depended on the debt or reserve carried over from your first term.

The same scenario could apply after winning your third election and at the beginning of your third term, an overseas sector is included in the game with corresponding policies added into the game, and a new debt ceiling worked out by the AI that depended on the debt or reserve carried over from your government sector and financial sector.

hmmmm interesting anlysis

An alternative way for the financial sector to be incorporated into the game would be if certain economic criteria were met like:

Income exceeds expenditure

GDP had hit its growth limit and

At least two out of these three situations had occurred tourism boom, technological advantage and high productivity

At that point a whole lot of new policies, statistics and situations are added into the game that correspond with the financial sector leakage.

The major reason I think Democracy 2 becomes less challenging after completing the first term is because its narratives are misguided and under developed.

The political achievements screen needs to be abolished as the utopias stop the game from progressing.

I consider myself to be a left popperian, which is one of a number of political beliefs I hold.

According to Karl Popper all change needs to be evolutionary and the truth is unreachable but we can move closer to it.

Karl Popper developed a Diagram of Scientific Development or Scientific Method

P1 -> TT -> EE -> P2

In which P1 is a problem from which we start; TT is a theory that we tentatively propose to solve it; EE is error elimination, or criticism; and P2 is a new problem or set of problems that emerges as a result of our criticism.

Let me demonstrate what I mean by using a narrative developed by the sociologist Francis Fukuyama.

The shift from industrial manufacturing societies, to service economy societies in developed countries bought many benefits, one of which facilitated the women’s liberation movement that allowed women to move into the workforce and earn an independent income in order to escape poverty. This happened because the white collar service jobs better suited women than the manufacturing blue collar work that it replaced. This change in the structure of our economies increased women’s participation in the workforce, but this increased participation in the workplace led to a large increase in the divorce rate, as relationships became less stable, and less permanent, and a decrease in birth rates emerged, among other problems.

A possible solution to such problems might include a mothers benefit, to encourage women to become full time mothers, which would create other problems.

Could you not also argue that an increase in divorce rate is related to a decline in the importance of religion in peoples lives, with the subsequent rise in acceptability of divorce, coupled with increasing affluence and economic output that makes it more viable for women to leave their husbands and live alone.
In other words, those women were just as unhappy and divorce-prone as before, but could not afford to take that step.
Just another way of looking at it.

Correct, its just someone’s conjecture that needs to be tested.

The point that I am trying to make is that a utopia is a truth, and as human beings the truth is unobtainable, but we can move closer to it.

Karl Popper believed that theories could be tested but not verified because he believed in the concept of falliblity

Karl Poppers theories on scientific research are a minority position among philosophers of the sciences, but he is the only philosopher who is widely read among research scientists.

I read a book several years ago called the ‘THE GREAT DISRUPTION Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order’. The book is written by Francis Fukuyama and the copyright date is 1999. I believe that this book will give you the narrative required to extend the games playability past the first election, and the first term in office.

The book offers an explanation for global trends evident in modern and western countries from around 1965. It creates links between the economies of these countries, and social trends like divorce, fertility and crime. It offers an explanation for philosophical changes like the decline of community, and the rise in individualism in these countries. It also gives a plausible explanation for the massive rise in the participation rate of women in the workforce and declining levels of trust.

The main narrative in the book seems to be that structural changes in the economies of these first world countries from being predominantly industrial manufacturing economies, to information economies has affected and changed every other sphere within these societies. It draws a parallel between what we have been going through, and the industrial revolution that occurred in Western European countries centuries ago. It shows the similarities between what happened then, and what is happening now, socially and demographically.

I read this book several years ago, so I can’t remember everything that was in it, but I am very certain that it can help you to extend the playability of this game.

Genuine Progress Index

I found an interesting and very detailed website called GPI Atlantic that has developed an alternative measurement of Gross Domestic Product, which it calls the Genuine Progress Index.

Like GDP, GPI considers the economic contributions of households, and includes volunteer work, but subtracts factors such as crime, pollution and family breakdown.

The website includes the Genuine Progress Index accounts for the Canadian province of Nova Scotia for 2008.

If the game could be developed so that it had two narratives operating simultaneously, one operating over the long-run and the other operating over the short-run, the playability of the game would be increased.

The present games narrative seems to be based on a human capital strategy, and that narrative sustains the game throughout the players first term. If a longer term strategy could be devised based on transforming societies from being manufacturing societies to information societies or agricultural societies to manufacturing societies, it would extend the playability of the game past a players first term.

I don’t know if the game can be structured like this without confusing people, but if it can it would improve the game dramatically.

These are all the components that make up Canada’s Genuine Progress Index

Time Use
• Value of Civic and Voluntary Work
• Value of Unpaid Housework and Child Care
• Value of Leisure Time
• Paid Work Hours

Living Standards
• Income and its Distribution
• Financial Security - Debt and Assets
• Economic Security Index

Natural Capital
• Soils & Agriculture
• Forests
• Fisheries and Marine Resources
• Energy
• Air
• Water

Human Impact on the Environment
• Solid Waste
• Ecological Footprint
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Transportation

Human and Social Capital
• Population Health
• Costs of Crime
• Educational Attainment

I’d like more flexibility with the 0+(x*0.5) equation, so you can have decreasingly effective policies, ect. We need a way to times two variables together! Also, major differances between countries, so not all countries have 26% poor, 9% wealthy. Policies which are only available for certain countries would be nice…I’d buy it just for easier moding!
Long-term changes like lower oil supply, climate change would be nice(disastorous really, but fun).

I have found an interesting website on national wellbeing accounts, that measures peoples personal and social wellbeing.

nef has set out a radical proposal to guide the direction of modern societies and the lives of people who live in them. In contrast to a narrow focus on economic indicators, it calls for governments to directly measure people’s subjective well-being: their experiences, feelings and perceptions of how their lives are going. These measures should be collected on a regular, systematic basis and published as National Accounts of Well-being. They provide a new way of assessing societal progress, based on people’s real experience of their lives.

As the famous Robert Kennedy quote shows, the limitations of economic measures have long been recognised. National Accounts of Well-being now provide a way to establish a much more meaningful measure of national success.

Nice link, I read about this in the newspapers at the weekend, with the UK being placed fairly badly in terms of happiness. That makes a lot of sense to me. Everyone in the UK could work 60 hour weeks and have more money (or more physical goods anyway) but the quality of life is a separate issue.
I wonder if there is an argument that Democracy 2 needs a lot more measures of stuff like this? The stress epidemic is the catch-all event for tracking it right now, but it could certainly be expanded upon.

People are idiots!
They will vote mainly based on fears and money.
Quality of life may be important, but I don’t think it actually effects how anybody votes.

Maybe you could have a national working week slider 32 hour week 35 hour week 38 hour week 40 hour week.

I know France introduced a 35 hour week a few years ago,8599,1873245,00.html

An annual leave policy is something you can look at, here in Australia we are entitled to 4 weeks annual leave a year on full pay with 13.5% loading.

We also have long service leave for 3 months on full pay. In the private sector its every 15 years and in the govt sector its every 7 years.

Personal leave which is made up of sick leave, carers leave and short-leave on full pay of which we are allocated 15 days a year that accumulate is something esle you can look at.