Article so this post makes sense

Half a year ago Cliffski wrote about possibly adding complex nationalization into Dem3. I personally think that would be fantastic. Does anyone know if this is still on the agenda? On the back burner? An abandoned project? Was it even considered to begin with? Or is it being saved for 1/24, just to celebrate my birthday, since I definitely matter that much?

Using the banking example, I think it would make more sense to add a central bank that allows you to conduct monetary policy first?

Why not both? Or even allow the creation of a central bank that is independent from legislative pressures, or under government control?

Nationalization is a fairly common state policy in democracies, it would make perfect sense for it to exist in the game.

Both would work.

I did make a reply to another topic on this very subject with an idea… but it never got responded to (sadface) - so I will copy/paste it here - see what you all think :slight_smile:

[i]"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 :D"[/i]