I have a few big problems with these in the current game. The real issue basically comes down to that you need to max out all policies that decrease illegal immigration in order to not have the crisis. Super unrealistic and I’d say a big factor is how easy it is to trigger the “crisis.”
So let’s say you do all the stuff to get rid of the crisis, well now 75% of your population is annoyed at you. Why? Well because in order to not have illegal immigration you need to max out the policies that increase immigration. But you also need stuff Ethnic Minorities hate like banning foreign churches and border walls (and if you don’t have border wall you need to ban airports and essentially make your country a north korea in terms of how many people can come in or out.) Another side effect of maxing out immigration is a huge unemployment increase. This is fair but the increase is too much I feel and there are not enough stuff to decrease unemployment since even if you put all anti-unemployment policies at max you still don’t have a good unemployment rate.
Solution: lower effect of immigration on unemployment and increase the effect of GDP on unemployment since apparently a “maxed out economy” (which is impossible since realistically GDP doesn’t reach a limit like in the game) only has a 29% decrease on unemployment, which if the perfect economy barely decreases unemployment then that seems like it’s a simulation problem.
Another solution is making private industries equal to public services in terms of unemployment decrease since by nationalizing everything your unemployment decreases despite there being the same amount of jobs available realistically in an economy where the GDP boosts all private industries the highest it can boost them.
Anyways I know there’s been other topics about the rebalancing of immigration but I feel like they haven’t really given solutions. I think this is actually pretty important because most of the time you don’t even do anything to cause this besides having a functioning country which is definitely not good simulation because otherwise the real world would be going crazy on how to stop the tiny percentage of immigrants which for some reason is enough to qualify calling it a crisis and every country has no idea how to deal with it until one decides to go North Korea and isolate themselves from everyone else in a tight seal yet still allowing open borders according to their immigration policy.
I wouldn’t really agree with lowering the Immigration impact on Unemployment, I think we should just have more options for increasing Employment.
Increasing the amount of Unemployment reduction by thriving Private Industries would be good, as you say, as well as perhaps some legal muscling of the definitions of Unemployment (Nazi Germany achieved their record low unemployment rates through making it so Women didn’t count as unemployed, we could perhaps have some kind of “Homebuilding Initiative” policy, that reducing unemployment by taking women out of the labour market, to the anger of capitalists, liberals, and socialists, but to the happiness of Religious and Conservatives).
Equally, I think we just need to reduce how much influences the Immigration statistics. We have lots of policies now for reducing Immigration, more than we had before the Immigration update, but they don’t do anything because Immigration has now been made even greater in number to “balance” it, meaning nothing has really changed at all.
Additionally, adding an option for “Total Immigation Ban” on the Immigration Rules slider would be good, and also Deportation Agencies to get rid of more Illegal Immigrants, which is something I was personally advocating for for a long while now. Also we could have Rights for Immigrants, which determines which social services they’re allowed to access (no rights, rights to welfare, rights to housing, rights to healthcare, rights to vote) on a slider, with lower ends reducing Immigration and higher ends radically increasing.
I agree. The economic effects of immigration should be negligible. The game needs to be challenging and the challenge should come from the immigration policies effect on the public opinion not on the economic impact of immigration itself. The only time immigration could have an economic impact is if you are a small country with a refugee crisis. For large economies like US and European countries any immigration is a drop in the bucket.
I agree on the GDP employment relation also. It is not realistic to have a maxed economy and no labor shortage. When your economy is maxed is should automatically create a labor shortage crisis!
I’m glad I’m not alone in seeing these problems. It seems impossible to create an economy with full employment withing taking a balently xenophobic approach. I would say that legal immigration increasing unemployment is debatable at best, a robust GDP has too little of an impact on employment. Unemployment has something in common with the environment in that it is a problem which cannot be solved. I’d be ok with problems which cannot be solved without causing another problem, but problems which cannot be solved at all are annoying.
I don’t mind if these changes aren’t implemented and other methods are used, but I’m just tired of having to put my country on extreme border controls, no airports, and other illegal immigration deterrents that make me isolate my country or have to turn to extreme xenophobia in order to not deal with the massive unemployment caused by illegal immigration. The only real choice to have a normal country is to make your ethnic minorities hate you which is super unrealistic.
im thinking the developer left it this way to make a challenge but thats why im trying to sell the idea that the challenge should be political. For most countries immigration is not an economic problem but it sure as heck is a political problem. Depending on your immigration positions it should make it almost impossible to get some votes. Make the political impact much stronger and the economic impact lower.
There is no such thing as single issue voter.
Even if you reduced voter group happiness to 0% while having 100% membership, you can still win game easily.
well that’s one of the problems. We dont necessarily need a single issue voter, but it’s too easy to keep everyone happy. Political consequences for decisions need to be increased across the board. I think more attention should be put on the political challenges in the game rather than the technical ones.
While it’s true that separating out immigration and illegal immigration has allowed for some interesting and worthwhile developments in the game, I strongly agree that immigration now has too much of an effect on unemployment (and on healthcare demand).
The above is right: immigration and illegal immigration accurately should have a big impact on voters’ perceptions of the economic and social effects - so, Conservatives, Retired, Parents, Patriots should all be angered by high immigration & illegal immigration, but these effects on voters should considerably outweigh the actual economic effects (which, I would argue should be positive - as eg immigration increases healthcare supply much more than it increases healthcare demand - but maybe easier for game purposes to show net actual economic effects of immigration being zero or close to zero).
This ties in with one of the other problems I’ve pointed out before. How “hard” it is to win an election depends on how long you’ve been playing. The game gets easy after the first re-election. The issue I pointed out is that the voters react to current static conditions far more than what has changed. Liberal voters in America for example, will still strongly dislike me after a term even if every move I made that related to liberalism or conservatism was in a liberal direction. The fact that America starts out with so many things liberals hate means I have to go on a liberal bonanza to get them to like me inside of 4 years.