[Freeciv-Dev] Re: more considerations about trade routes

[Martin Olveyra <molv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Governments have sometimes been involved in trade. That is true. In fact 
they are involved, when they themselves are providers or customers. 
Perhaps you are referring to this fact.
But when we are speaking of intervention (not participation) in trade, 
government only obstaculizes.
I understand that you are (correctly) separating private wealth from 
government wealth. If we reason this way, and speaking in freeciv terms, 
trade generates private luxury, and hapiness. And there are always a 
balance between trade and tax level. If you apply more taxes, you 
inhibit trade.
This is not exactly a reinvention of the tax settings, but instead a 
modification. May be a more realistic and balanced modification. 
Actually the game establishes a balance between luxury and taxes. 
Perhaps a balance between trade and taxes is more rational. You can have 
two controls: one that balances internal trade and internal taxes, and 
other that balances external trade and external taxes.
Observe that if you design the game in this way you can controlate in a 
more general manner the effects of the different classes of government, 
without having to chose them specifically. The kind of governments 
defined in freeciv is just a way to give the posibility to choose 
between more or less interventionism, between more or less revenues for 
the state, between more or less posibility of government consumption 
and, as consecuence, of wars. But with a disadvantage: you cannot choose 
intermediate state of government, but only those specified in the rulesets.
I dont say that you must redesign the game. But at least consider that 
if you do that, the trade, taxes and government system would be unified, 
and would be more realistic and more flexible, but at the same time with 
much less micromanagment complications. Even the AI system would be more 
simple.
¿what about revolutions? This can be based on culture. Instead of press 
for a change in what in freeciv is a type of government, it press on the 
level of interventionism and statism.
Per Inge Mathisen wrote:

> On Tue, 9 May 2006, Martin Olveyra wrote:
>
> > In the real world, trade is a spontaneous conduct of people. They 
> > dont need to be directed by governments in order to trade each other. 
> > Instead, the function of government is to obstaculize trade (think in 
> > customs, customs duty, protectionism, taxes, etc). When two 
> > governments celebrate a free exchange pact, a commercial agree, etc, 
> > they are not impelling trade, but they are establishing exceptions to 
> > the obstaculizations themself impose.
> > So ¿why, instead of leave a system in which we, the players, must act 
> > in order to establish trade routes, they instead are created 
> > spontaneously unless we obstaculize them? This alternative only takes 
> > from us the establishment of the degree of customs duty and of 
> > customs control, with the benefits for the government of more tax 
> > revenues, at the cost of less trade.
> I could nitpick and say that historically this is not entirely 
> accurate, as governments have sometimes been quite involved in trade, 
> but the more important objection is that what the player (the 
> government) gets in tax revenues, and trade, is the same thing.
> You could say one is gold, and the other is, say, luxuries, 
> representing private wealth, and have a control that would balance 
> between them, but then you would merely reinvent the tax settings.
>   - Per