I was just thinking about the thread regarding playing as am independent Scotland. This then got me thinking about the differences between Westminster policy making and Holyrood. Scotland is a far more left wing socialist country than the rest of the UK especially with the SNP in power. Anyway my point is Holyrood believes in Nationalisation while Westminster believes in privatisation. So I was wondering if it would be possible to add in the ability to nationalise things like railways, energy, mail (thanks Westminster for the sell off).
In game there are certain policies that have a cost to income ratio this would be the same for a nationalised railway for instance, instead of subsidising a private railway the money would be spent but in turn it would increase the amount that is returned to the treasury in fares from passengers. Anyone have any thoughts on this idea?
I have thought about this a lot. I have a few ideas… maybe:
I thought that in the Economy section of the screen you could have an Industry button, and when you click on it, it opens a big page with a list of different industries (banking, farming, mining, heavy industry, light industry etc); when you click on one of those industries, it brings up some information about it, and on the bottom is a slider. The slider is sets a percentage, and that percentage represents how much shares the government owns in that industry. When set to zero (on the left) it says TOTALLY PRIVATELY OWNED and when set at 100% it says TOTALLY STATE-OWNED.
When you increase the slider and and accept the change, it will cost the government some money to buy the shares, but then over time the government will get revenue from the business, based on how many shares they own. Things such as GDP and the global economy can affect how profitable each industry is, and you will get more money if that industry is more profitable. Also if the industry makes a loss, that revenue will turn into a cost for the government based on how many shares they have.
Finally depending on whether the business is more privately owned or more state owned, could give different benefits/disadvantages. For example, some people say that state-owned businesses should decrease GDP… I disagree. Rather I think that, to make it balanced and fun, the different ownerships should affect things that in themselves affect GDP. For example, if the business is more privately owned, it should give a bonus to Technology (simulating increased innovation), and if it is more state-owned then it should decrease unemployment to a higher extent (simulating the government being able to take on more workers and worrying less about the costs) etc.
Nothing has to be set in stone at this point, but it is just an idea. I would love to get Cliff’s opinion on it though
