Capto Iugulum Background Thread

[EQandcivfanatic]

Also as for Bioshock Infinite, the culture displayed in that game is not too far diverted from Scott-era America in my opinion, though it's a little out of date with the current government.

 

[Jehoshua]

ooc: Out of date for the government, but not perhaps for the people on the street

 

[Grandkhan]

Cheers EQ, you're amazing. Some kind of statistical analysis to come.

 

[JohannaK]

Statistical analysis? Get all of them stats together, then.

 

[Grandkhan]

The Distribution of Economic Power: 1900 Compared to the Year 1930​

Note: The following is assuming that nothing too drastic will happen in 1930 that will significantly affect global economies. I did this with 30 as a year number because I forgot that we had only 29 years down. Shouldn't be too drastic.

Global Economies, 1900 - 1930​

Let's start with the basics. In 1900, the total global EP (TGEP) was 6380 EP. In 1930 the TGEP was 8588 EP. This gives us a growth rate of 34.61% over 30 years, or an exponential growth rate of 0.9% per year.

The average EP per country in 1900 was 127.6EP, whereas in 1930 it was 96.49. This can probably be attributed to the recent increase in nations worldwide (with the collapse of the FBC, Hungary, and the United States) and ongoing decolonisation.

As an aside, many countries that we now think of as global economic powers were actually quite poor in 1900. Argentina and Brazil were actually significantly below average in terms of EP in 1900, with 70 and 112 EP respectively.

Dominant Economic Powers​

Methodology: To compare dominant economic powers, I have created a concept I call 'Netherlands Tier' nations. A Netherlands Tier nation is a country with what is perceived as sizeable economic clout and significant economic dominance - my initial example of this was the Netherlands in 1900, which I consider a baseline for economic power in 1900. This allows me to create a set of 'Economic Great Powers' to study the changes in their development.

Bear in mind that the concept of Netherlands Tier is purely economic. Military strength, foreign influence, or technological advancement has zero influence on whether you are above or below Netherlands Tier. Brazil didn't make it into Netherlands tier in 1900, even though Brazil basically instigated the Great War on its own. Its an economic concept.

Netherlands Tier in 1900 was every country with an EP per turn income above 205 - that of the Netherlands. In 1900 these countries were:

Austria (258), Brandenburg (220), Franco-Burgundian Confederation (475), Netherlands (205) Poland (305), Russia (390), Scandinavia (368), Spain (615), UK (510), USA (365), Japan (290)

Together, these 11 countries comprised 62.71% of the global economy in 1900. The average EP of the Netherlands Tier countries was 363.73.

So what does Netherlands Tier mean in 1930? Well, the global EP growth rate can be treated as a level of inflation. If you take the EP of some country in 1900 and multiply it by 1.3461, you'll get its equivalent in 1930 EP turns, because we've had significant amounts of growth and a lot of things are more expensive now, up to and including armies.

To get Netherlands Tier in 1930, we multiply 205 by 1.3461 to get 275. This is, by complete and total coincidence, the EP of Argentina, which is the country I'd consider the closest equivalent to the Netherlands in 1930.

The Netherlands Tier countries in 1930 are: Countries 1930: Germany (705), Italy (373), Russia (747), Scandinavia (325), UK (720), Argentina (275), Brazil (321), Japan (690)

These countries together comprised 48.39% of the Global economy, implying a more egalitarian distribution of wealth. However, the average EP of a Netherlands Tier country in 1930 comes out to 519.5, with a growth rate of 1.2%. This is higher than the global growth rate, implying that while there are a lot more small, poor countries around, the rich are getting significantly richer.

It is interesting to note that of the 11 Netherlands Tier powers in 1900, only four were Netherlands Tier in 1930. Of the other seven, four are no longer extant, and the other three have been butchered beyond recognition. Of the Netherlands Tier countries in 1930, two did not exist in 1900, and another two were below average economically. This implies a high capacity of changeover, and makes the case that in our world, losing a war is economically disastrous.

Projections Based on Current Events​

What we are likely seeing is the centralisation of power among a few major powers. Of the powers below Netherlands tier, there are only six above 150EP, and below that its basically anklebiters below 100. Compare that to 1900, when you had a whole bunch of countries with 150 and 120EP, etc. Its going to get a lot harder for smaller nations to survive without a major benefactor - we saw that with Portugal, which got jumped by a few countries in Netherlands Tier or just below, and told to get out - without a major benefactor with power projection capabilities, it wasn't able to hold its new gains and had to leave.

Also, given what we've been seeing with the recent economic growth numbers, the big economies are just going to keep getting bigger. Places like Denmark, Portugal, Turkey, Croatia, or most of Africa is just going to have to deal with it.

 

[Crezth]

True. The OOC influence of Bioshock Infinite on both Crezth and EQ is hard to deny.

Well. The racism/exceptionalism stuff is with tongue firmly in cheek. But it's hard to deny that the USA doesn't have a vested interest in sticking to its knitting right now. PADA is a matter of political expediency, and I don't think even the new liberty movement is devoted to the notion of international brotherhood as such. After all, how much brotherhood can there be when the USA is surrounded by former provinces, at least 33% of which are hostile and 66% of which keep rattling sabers?

 

[JohannaK]

Okay. *signs treaties with Brazil, Argentina, US, UK, Russia, Japan and Germany* Did I forget someone?

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Actually it HAS been 30 years since those stats. Those stats would apply for the end of year in 1899. The new stats apply for the end of the year in 1929.

 

[ChiefDesigner]

I like the idea of UPRA marines sailing into Kingston harbour just as the Portuguese pull out and yelling 'yoink' as they steal an entire island right out from PADA's noses.

I never managed to work this in, but the anthem of the UPRA Marines may in fact the first two stanzas of "Montego Bay."

(Part of the setup is making something that acronyms to "BOAC".)


Link to video.

Vernon'll meet me when the BOAC lands
Keys to the MG will be in his hands
Adjust to the driving 'n' I'm on my way
It's all on the right side in Montego Bay
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh
Come sing me La
Come sing me Montego Bay
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh

'N' Gillian'll meet me like a brother would
I think I remember but it's twice as good
Like how cool the rum is from his silver tray
I thirst to be thirsty in Montego Bay
Sing out; oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh
Come sing me La
Come sing me Montego Bay
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh

 

[Jehoshua]

Projections Based on Current Events​

What we are likely seeing is the centralisation of power among a few major powers. Of the powers below Netherlands tier, there are only six above 150EP, and below that its basically anklebiters below 100. Compare that to 1900, when you had a whole bunch of countries with 150 and 120EP, etc. Its going to get a lot harder for smaller nations to survive without a major benefactor - we saw that with Portugal, which got jumped by a few countries in Netherlands Tier or just below, and told to get out - without a major benefactor with power projection capabilities, it wasn't able to hold its new gains and had to leave.

Also, given what we've been seeing with the recent economic growth numbers, the big economies are just going to keep getting bigger. Places like Denmark, Portugal, Turkey, Croatia, or most of Africa is just going to have to deal with it.

I would say that although correct in certain ways (consolidation of economic dominance in a few powers in the current phase of the economy) the overall analysis is a bit too simplistic. For example I think it fails to take account of the fact that the large economies cannot exponentially get bigger indefinitely.

As I see it, ultimately correspondingly higher worker costs in wealthier nations and the finite demographic potential with which to hold any one economy will result in economic development shifting from the rich nations into the poorer, and insodoing this will severely limit, or in some cases even reverse the rate of growth in many of the economic powers that currently exist and place the impetus for growth towards the sphere of poorer nations, who can take advantage of low wages, and greater demographic potential (although obviously some nations, like landlocked impoverished and oil poor african states, will likely remain dirt poor since they are undesirable for business). In addition, newer industries that develop will likely do so in nations less developed now, to take advantage of cheap labour and the potential for growth in those nations, and also due to the fact wealthier nations will be "overloaded" if you will with other industries which will limit impetus for development in new areas.

This will result in stagnation in some of the current economic powers, a likely example being Germany which is relatively constrained demographically (Brazil with its smaller economy, but great potential for demographic growth, and substantial natural resources will likely have a way to go before it stagnates to pose a counterpoint, and it can always play exporter of resources to other economies while Germany can't). This could lead to a recession or even a depression developing during the course of the game, and at the very least it heralds economic headeachs for some. With the nation likely the most likely to be worst off being our Scandinavian friends precisely due to the concentration of economic power there in the unions, and the pressure there for high wages that comes from proletarism. This will circumscribe diversification of industry and limit new development in general, excacerbating the economic damage to Scandinavia when the limit to its growth arrives precisely since its a "perfect storm" of the characteristics that will compel the economic shift to other regions. AND Thats not to mention Scandinavia is even worse off due to political instability and tensions (like nationalists and with regards to Denmark and Russia) making economic investment there even less tempting for new industry. Anyways, at the very least, I don't think we will see in quite the way Grandkhan proposed.

EDIT: Oh and to speak for the Papal States, its in a good position to take advantage of new economic development and capital, because it is relatively undeveloped , politically stable, close to rich european markets and is not burdened with excessive wages (due to the insignificance of prole and liberal influences), while also having already developed infrastructure for industry and a relatively (to the population) high degree of wealth thanks to the pilgrims who come to Rome (the Papal States money comes from tourism and religion, or at least thats what I suspect considering the almost total lack of industry before I took over, wars, and the only limited development Ive overseen), and education level, which could be turned to assisting new industry. That said due to its small size its potential obviously is always going to be limited, although this potential means the papal states can possibly attain a very high income, I doubt it will ever be a top tier economic power.

 

[Luckymoose]

Brazil is a behemoth hatching from the solid gold soil of South America.

 

[Lord of Elves]

@Jehoshua, I disagree with your analysis entirely, not merely in order to bolster my standing from an OOC position but because you have made assumptions which are false as well as not taking into account the two most significant variables of my economy, those being self-sufficiency and exports. The unions do not exist to guarantee high wages (they don't do that) neither are they separate from the governmental power structure (they aren't). Unions and government are incestuous, and neither one is going to become separate from the interests of the other anytime soon.

Moving on, Scandinavia is still the world's best source and largest manufacturer of arms and civilian-grade steel, which will only become more valuable as first world states with luxury good economies want things like fridges, cars, etc. Our economy, while geared heavily towards exporting desired goods like steel, is not built with any primary imports in mind and can supplement itself domestically vis a vis our own arms industry.

Finally, intra-Scandinavian nationalism has been silent for nearly a century. Given the circumstances of the Union Crisis and the intermarriage of House Vasa and the line of Harald I the "True King of Norway", I doubt that the concept of the Norwegian nation exists in the same way it does OTL. Nationalist incidents are almost certainly the work of foreign agents

 

[Jehoshua]

self-sufficiency is irrelevant since it is only pertinent to the domestic economy, which grows with population and wage increases respectively and which also faces a losing competition with cheap foreign goods (short of subsidisation and tarriffs). As to the unions, im not saying they guarantee high wages (the wealth differential does that, and that applies to a lot of powers) im saying that the union dominance over the economic system stifles economic diversification due to the vested interests they have in the current economic pattern which will limit Scandinavias ability to partake of new economic phenomena.

As to arms and steel, mostly steel since its the most relevant industry here due to the limited sphere of arms. You are quite correct that new industry will want steel, with Scandinavia being able to export it. However the problem is that Scandinavia lacks monopoly, and plenty of other sources for raw iron are available. Steelworks developments furthermore will likely take advantage of cheaper wages in the third world and begin to shift there, leaving Scandinavias steelworks in the lurch, possibly to the point of decline. As such I don't think my analysis is unreasonable.

As to instability in Scandinavia, whether its foreign provoked or organic is irrelevant. Instability is instability and makes business wary to invest

 

[Lord of Elves]

self-sufficiency is irrelevant since it is only pertinent to the domestic economy, which grows with population and wage increases respectively. As to the unions, im not saying they guarantee high wages (the wealth differential does that, and that applies to a lot of powers) im saying that the union dominance over the economic system stifles economic diversification due to the vested interests they have in the current economic pattern which will limit Scandinavias ability to partake of new economic phenomena.

As to arms and steel, mostly steel since its the most relevant industry here due to the limited sphere of arms. You are quite correct that new industry will want steel, with Scandinavia being able to export it. However the problem is that Scandinavia lacks monopoly, and plenty of other sources for raw iron are available. Steelworks developments furthermore will likely take advantage of cheaper wages in the third world and begin to shift there, leaving Scandinavias steelworks in the lurch, possibly to the point of decline. As such I don't think my analysis is unreasonable.

As to instability in Scandinavia, whether its foreign provoked or organic is irrelevant. Instability is instability and makes business wary to invest

Economic interdependence is poor planning. What I mean by that is that no one can possibly account for all the different scenarios which could result in a downturn vis a vis international misfortune. I have already invested considerable sums of EP into upgrading and modernizing existing steel foundries and harvesting facilities, to the point that they are likely the best in the world. Theoretically speaking, with the total control over the economy that I have at my disposal, I could buy excess products with government funds or do makework projects/major military expansion purely for the sake of maintaining economic normalcy. Keynes!

The unions exist to ensure that workers are represented in their workplace, and partake of the shares of their labor according to the worth of their labor. They have never been concerned with the maintenance of wages or even worker equality. It is accepted that not all men work or are necessarily created equal, rather we should provide them with the tools to achieve equality and an environment in which to do so.

Regarding investment, the majority of business is supported directly by the government and the people through the labor unions.

As far as "cheaper wages in the third world", to an extent public housing and services projects render monetary concerns like wages irrelevant. Further investment could yield similar dividends.

Send us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to be free. We work for cheap.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Despite requests, I cannot actually comment on the economics without tipping the hand which must not be tipped lest the world be consumed with fire and people actually know how it works.

 

[Luckymoose]

Brazil actually has far more iron ore deposits of greater yield than Scandinavia, somewhere around 10% of the entire world's reserves. Along with a huge assortment of other metals, gems, and oil/gas. With the embargo on Brazil, these will be developed more thoroughly and quickly to replace the loss of European steel in favor of domestic steel.

In other words, Brazil has the talk and the walk.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Brazil actually has far more iron ore deposits of greater yield than Scandinavia, somewhere around 10% of the entire world's reserves. Along with a huge assortment of other metals, gems, and oil/gas. With the embargo on Brazil, these will be developed more thoroughly and quickly to replace the loss of European steel in favor of domestic steel.

In other words, Brazil has the talk and the walk.

"Brazil' - Myth or Fact? Proletariat Worldwide claims to have unearthed clues that the land of Portugese robber barons is a real life Atlantis. Tune your radio to channel 246.01 for more info.

 

[Quisani]

"Brazil' - Myth or Fact? Proletariat Worldwide claims to have unearthed clues that the land of Portugese robber barons is a real life Atlantis. Tune your radio to channel 246.01 for more info.

"This week on Mysterious Myths or Legendary Legends, we shall discuss the lost city of gold, El Dorado, and the continual denial of it's existence by the Brazilian Government. What does Emperor Pedro III know? Later, we shall discuss the chupacabra and it's many sightings in Aztlan and Mayaland. What terror does this create hold and does it even exist? Tune in to find out!"

 

[qoou]

Okay. *signs treaties with Brazil, Argentina, US, UK, Russia, Japan and Germany* Did I forget someone?

Colombia is about to have 2239 EP income.

 

[Grandkhan]

I personally posit that Brazil does not actually exist.

In all seriousness, Jehoshua's points would be very valid in the real world, but EQnomics (as I will so dub it) is a strange abstraction and we have absolutely zero idea how it works.

If it was the real world, we'd have had a major economic depression by now. Brazil has had a 3.5% real growth rate (assuming EP is balanced for inflation). The United States in the 1920s had a GDP growth rate of 2.7%, [1], and we know what that led to. Argentina's is even worse, with a real growth rate of 4.4%.

These countries should have had a horrible depression by now, because growth rates like 4.4% just aren't sustainable.

My point is that this shows that whatever abstraction EQ is using doesn't really follow real world economics that much (which is fair enough, I guess, given CI is a political simulator first and foremost) so the best we can really do is extrapolate from present trends.

EDIT: To be fair, unsustainable growth wasn't the only cause of the Great Depression (buying on margin, oversupply), but it was a big one.