Jump to content
Bradley

Our current economic situation, tax and the way forward

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Squeegee said:

Sorry when I said “his nation” I was referring to Maeve not sheepy. I assume that’s what you thought I meant given your response at least. 

Oh. I was confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Down for the 10 tax day. Rip the bandaid off now to let that thing scab over quickly. How we decide in getting those days is up to yall. I would like to see growth between all of us instead of the few. If we have a fat and healthy bank, the easier we can achieve that goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Anun Tidera said:

How much money does SK get back from loans to members?

We charge 2.5% of the remainder of loans - so we make money on the loans we send out.

 

All loans are fully paid back. No loan has been written off in the last 6 months and I don't see a reason for that to change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Callum said:

Shocking. The socialist government ran out of money.

 

10 days of tax seems the most efficient and otherwise harmless.

Alternatively, have an opt in 100% monetary tax. For as long as said person wants. I've just been buy credits for the last however many weeks. So I really don't mind sitting on a tax bracket for the foreseeable future.

 

An interesting idea & one I'll implement in the coming days. Thanks!

13 hours ago, Anun Tidera said:

Why not petition Sheepy to make cities and infrastructure cheaper? And with the current model, is it even worth it for people of your size to expand?

Sheepy has repeatedly ruled out changes to city costs. Plus, we can't make econ decisions based on some petition which he'll honestly just ignore anyway. He has no interest in helping bigger nations - he's said it multiple times. His interest is (and correctly in my view) helping smaller nations catch up with the bigger ones. Cheapening the cost of cities won't do that.

 

It is worth it to continue expanding. AT some point it becomes less about return on investment and more about the military capabilities more cities give you. Once you get over city 25 the ROI becomes over a year and worse the more cities you build. So in that sense no. But ROI only explains and measures so much.

Edited by Bradley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Squeegee said:

Petitioning Sheepy won't get us anywhere nor is it really necessary to be fair. His nation is under performing when it comes to monetary gain as it is currently. And there are a lot of reasons its worth it to expand at that size in fact it's not wise to stop growth at any tier otherwise nations will fall behind especially in a war related aspect. Nations with more cities are able to earn a lot more with nations that have less cities. In theory you could have a 10c nation that makes as much as a 20c nation however the cost of getting a 10c nation to make say 10m a day like a 20c nation could would be a lot more expensive because of the cost of infra needed to get to that point whereas with more cities you could buy more cheap infra in those cities.

Regardless of if I'm making less or more of others the price of cities does go up disproportionate to the income therefore it's harder for larger peeps to grow since we need to wait longer which was the point I wanted to get at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xaria said:

In all seriousness I think this is a bad idea, I think you should decrease it to 70-80%, let us have the opportunity to grow as well in these days because 10 days will feel like years and members will get tired of it all.

We've done 100% tax periods on a semi-regular basis before and everyone has always understood that it was necessary, so don't presume to speak for others. There's no functional difference to you between 80% and 100% except for the fact the the period will have to be longer below 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Xaria said:

In all seriousness I think this is a bad idea, I think you should decrease it to 70-80%, let us have the opportunity to grow as well in these days because 10 days will feel like years and members will get tired of it all.

Thanks for the contribution Xaria. It’s a valid point. 

 

As I said in my post, I’m open to variations of the 10 days. Perhaps 5 days 100, 2 days off, 5 days 100? 70-80% wouldn’t have the desired effect and ultimately we’d have to impose that level of tax for a longer period of time. I also don’t think that would have the effect you think it will - only having 20% of your income isn’t really very helpful in all honesty.

 

Would just note and emphasise that this is temporary. Moreover your resource tax would not be effected, meaning you could continue to sell the resources you produce. Personally I’ll still be able to make 100+m during this just through the sale of food.

Edited by Bradley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay - seems a consensus has been formed. We'll be going for the 100% cash tax for 10 days. 

 

To reduce the impact, we'll be doing 5 days at 100%, 2 days regular tax and 5 days 100%. This is in addition to the planned tax day this Sunday. Those who go onto gray will still face 10 days at 100% whenever they come back onto orange. 

 

So the schedule is as follows;

 

- Sunday 11th October: Cash tax raised to 100%, resource tax halved across the board.

- 19th - 23rd October: 100% cash tax (resources unaffected)

- 24th-25th October: regular tax

- 26th-30th October: 100% cash tax (resources unaffected)

 

If you prefer, I have made a nice graphic for you

Spoiler

Screenshot 2020-10-08 at 19.39.28.png

 

Everything then resumes as normal. In November we'll be having 2 tax days (as explained in the original post), and will do so every month for the foreseeable. Resource tax is not affected during any of these tax days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Xaria said:

In all seriousness I think this is a bad idea, I think you should decrease it to 70-80%, let us have the opportunity to grow as well in these days because 10 days will feel like years and members will get tired of it all.

If you produce resources, you could probably sell those

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anun Tidera said:

Yeah. Says the one who got the Moon Landing, which is a useless, expensive project that can't be destroyed.

Why does it matter if it can’t be destroyed? It didn’t take up a project slot because Moon Landing doesn’t take up a project slot. Even if it could be destroyed, I wouldn’t get anything back from it anyway. Destroying projects doesn’t give you any resources back whatsoever. 

 

I suppose my confused reaction was more about the relevance of such a statement on your part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bradley said:

Why does it matter if it can’t be destroyed? It didn’t take up a project slot because Moon Landing doesn’t take up a project slot. Even if it could be destroyed, I wouldn’t get anything back from it anyway. Destroying projects doesn’t give you any resources back whatsoever. 

 

I suppose my confused reaction was more about the relevance of such a statement on your part. 

How does it not take up a project slot? If it doesn't, why did you remove the Emergency Gasoline Reserve project to get it?image.png.c3be74aad1ceffeb1a145c7a9b63ea9e.png

 Can you send me an image of your project construction screen? And that $400 million or so that the Moon Landing costed could've been used for other useful projects, such as the Telecoms Satellite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anun Tidera said:

How does it not take up a project slot? If it doesn't, why did you remove the Emergency Gasoline Reserve project to get it?image.png.c3be74aad1ceffeb1a145c7a9b63ea9e.png

 

Because, like you, I was uninformed and thought it would take up a slot. It didn’t.

3 minutes ago, Anun Tidera said:

 

 Can you send me an image of your project construction screen? 

Sure, if it’s really necessary. I’ll ping you on discord.

4 minutes ago, Anun Tidera said:

And that $400 million or so that the Moon Landing costed could've been used for other useful projects, such as the Telecoms Satellite. 

Moon landing did not cost 400m. It cost 150m. 

 

This is also hijacking this thread. If you are really that invested in what I do with my nation, you can ping me on discord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Anun Tidera said:

Are there any long-term solutions to increase alliance income without cutting back on grants or being too much of a burden on the members of the alliance?

Growth! The more you guys grow, the more you pay in tax. I’ve been tracking tax income for the past 3 months and the rise has been quite something. 
 

The grants are an investment which will eventually pay for themselves. 
 

But we find ourselves in very unique circumstances, which is the reason we are somewhat struggling. We’ve never been faced with such a huge influx of newer players, and they need investment. I think long term the tax strategy I set out last month will work for nations now going through Blackfyre, we just didn’t implement that early enough to take full effect with your generation of recruits.

Edited by Bradley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bradley said:

Growth! The more you guys grow, the more you pay in tax. I’ve been tracking tax income for the past 3 months and the rise has been quite something. 
 

The grants are an investment which will eventually pay for themselves. 
 

But we find ourselves in very unique circumstances, which is the reason we are somewhat struggling. We’ve never been faced with such a huge influx of newer players, and they need investment. I think long term the tax strategy I set out last month will work for nations now going through Blackfyre, we just didn’t implement that early enough to take full effect with your generation of recruits.

How many new recruits are there compared to the wave I was in (the Drew Durnil wave, which caused a massive temporary growth in the activity of all of P&W)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anun Tidera said:

How many new recruits are there compared to the wave I was in (the Drew Durnil wave, which caused a massive temporary growth in the activity of all of P&W)?

I believe there were about 30 of you that stuck with it. Some went inactive after graduation though. A lot more came and went though - not an exaggeration to say that maybe 30-40 joined and left/went inactive. It was a REALLY busy time.

We currently have 10 nations going through Blackfyre. 

Edited by Bradley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Bradley said:

I believe there were about 30 of you that stuck with it. A lot more came and went though - not an exaggeration to say that maybe 30-40 joined and left/went inactive. It was a REALLY busy time.

We currently have 10 nations going through Blackfyre. 

And 25 applicants. Idk why

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...