Funny salary and earnings amounts


#1

Hello dear co-gamers,

I’ve made an attempt to figure out, how come my character (slim accomplished Phoebe) seems to accumulate proportionally so much more money by working in high-pay jobs, and yet the money leftover is rather scanty (25$ with 32700 pound salary). I was given the impression that the bills my character receives must be extremely small and the factor relating the salary to daily earnings very unusual.

So I investigated the subject a bit. The formula, in my opinion, can be stated like this:

sal = die (ear + ex),

where
sal is net salary per year,
die = days in era : the effective number of nominal days in one year (60 gaming days per year, I assume?)
ear = daily earnings left after deducting
ex = daily (obligatory, constant) expenses ((bills and?) tax), as stated: “Today, after (bills and tax)=ex, you earned ear” ), automatically deducted from your job earnings.

Let’s try this. As a waiter in (1) Happy Snacks (April 2006) with the salary of sal(1) = 6800 Ł I am left each day with ear(1) = 5.22 Ł (not taking tips into consideration). As a (2) Stanleys Law human rights lawyer (November 2013) the data is sal(2) = 32706 Ł and ear(2) = 25.09 Ł. Solving equations

sal(1)= sal = die (ear(1) + ex), sal(2)= sal = die (ear(2) + ex) we arrive to

exp = ( ear(2) sal(1) – ear(1) sal(2) ) / ( sal(2) - sal(1)) = barely -0.4 pence (slightly negative),

die = ( sal(2) - sal(1) ) / (ear (2) - ear (1)) = 1304

I checked with additional data (Nightclub Bouncer; City Clubs INC, 16080 salary, 12.34 net earning) that the data actually lie on the line, and with even more data the linear fit was still perfect, so the formula seems to be all right. :neutral_face:

Therefore it follows, expenditure for bills is indeed negligible - only few pounds per year, that means floating-point error, and what is left corresponds to extraordinary 1304 days of asserted earnings. :mrgreen:

What the heck :laughing:

Where have I made a mistake?

[Edited for negative money value comprehesion and floating point remarks, with intention to not confuse readers too much]


#2

Hmmm. Im looking at the code and its basically this:

float spendingmoney = GetCurrentSalary() * Get("GV_FIN_DISPOSABLEPERC"); float workdays = 365.0f * 5.0f/7.0f; float daily_earnings = spendingmoney/workdays;

so basically a fixed percentage of your wages goes on living expenses, and the percentage that you get hides in the config.txt file under
“GV_FIN_DISPOSABLEPERC”

If I do a sequel, I’d like to expand on all that area a lot.
Hope that helps :smiley:


#3

Aha, I get that. So the bills increase proportionally with the salary, while I presumed fixed bills.
I thought the salary was the net salary and the (more or less proportional) taxes were already subtracted :question: Why this proportional assumption?
Which, unfortunately, led to negative expenses in my equation, meaning the government is giving you some money back because you much overpaid the taxes (yeah, right :mrgreen: ) and the real (tax subtracted) expenses are included in the extra-net salary.

For my part, I would take ordinary net salary and fixed bills – or at least a mixture of proportional and mixed expenses -, or at least give some bonus for paying proportionally more, like allowing the character to move to a better apartment; but then all the job distance values should be altered… complications. :unamused:

I would fix everything as
float workdays = 365.0f5.0f/7.0f;
float spendingmoney = GetCurrentSalary()-Get(“GV_FIN_DISPOSABLEVAL”)- Get(“GV_FIN_SMALLPROPORTIONALFAC”)
Get(“GV_FIN_DISPOSABLEVAL”);
float daily_earnings = spendingmoney/workdays;

Just an idea, I shall give more thought.


#4

yes, thats the thing, you need to include loads of other stuff that way. I just presume you move to a better apartment when you earn more :smiley:


#5

I know, I know! :slight_smile:

Kudos is set in a socialistic environment! This is Slough in a parallel universe, where the concept of salaries is just like it should be, that is, basic cost of life proportional to the income! This is fun :stuck_out_tongue: I still remember the socialistic era in Yugoslavia (Slovenia was part of Yugoslavia), more precisely titoism (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titoism : unique socialism-based self-management&associated-labor system developed by Slovenian leader political intellectual Edvard Kardelj and maintained by Tito – also the reason for chilled relations between independent Yugoslavia and Russia and pronounced Slovene connection with West). The system worked in a similar way to Kudos: to the families with average earnings apartments (in low appeal city areas) were donated almost for free :exclamation: (5% family income for 10 years instalment pay, then the apartment is their own property); families with low income were granted additional benefits etc. With null unemployment (Slovenia was huge importer of workforce) and affordable essential goods the system functioned pretty well – at least people were quite happy if not wealthy, there were almost no beggars, less criminal offence (Ljubljana is still far the safest metropolis / largest city in whole Europe according to statistics). Of course, the system collapsed completely after Tito’s death and no strong charisma leader replacement. A great idea perhaps for the Democracy game though :wink:

Present situation is the usual one: young people cannot afford to live on their own, they live with parents till they are thirty or are sharing apartments, few prospect to create own family; one of the greatnesses of a game like Kudos is that we truly realize the troubles of the social situations, even if through game model incompleteness :slight_smile:
In reality, Kudos initial friends would be my roommates and I would really have to drive them crazy to lose touch with them (when they would move away). After some income threshold I would be able to live with my mate, if she/he earns enough. With high-pay jobs, I could live on my own if I wanted, but I guess this would cause some unhappiness.

Hence yes, for the next Kudos edition I suggest the following: high-pay jobs are always far away from the cheap apartment. In order to get to the job, we would either have to use the car or move in a better apartment – possibly harder to maintain (cleaning service more costly or something).
And also capable of storing more items – low-cost apartment would comprise limited number of bought items. :bulb:
Moreover, well-off friends would likely pay for pizzas and stuff when I’m poor and when I’m wealthy they would expect me to pay for the social activities. And so on; I can give more thoughts later if the debate heats (it’s late and I’m sleepy).

Nevertheless, the salary equation is just fine as it is for now; we can imagine the apartment considerations (progressing from slum to flat to twin house to villa) built into the proportionality factor, and maybe some socialistic ideas behind. 8)

Thank you for answers! :smiley:

Hope you didn’t find this post too boring, yours Phoebe


#6

too bad that you also dont presume moving closer to that better paying job :confused: