Is there any point in keeping some arable land undeveloped?

[Supply Slut]

If I use all my arable land, then instead of peasants I will only have unemployed. Neither are great but peasants are slightly better.

At the same time my SoL is very high and immigration is causing my population to grow much faster than I can build jobs. I keep expanding my construction sectors, but it’s never enough.

Is it worth keeping some unused arable land so some of these immigrants have something to do while better jobs becomes available? Or should I just develop it all for faster jobs then go back to urbanizing?

[LzDK14]

Don't bother. High SoL will kill your industry. I'm not joking. Some factories with high SoL can't produce enough goods on any combination of production methods to stay profitable. For example - power plants.

[kgkong]

Originally posted by Supply Slut:

If I use all my arable land, then instead of peasants I will only have unemployed. Neither are great but peasants are slightly better.

At the same time my SoL is very high and immigration is causing my population to grow much faster than I can build jobs. I keep expanding my construction sectors, but it’s never enough.

Is it worth keeping some unused arable land so some of these immigrants have something to do while better jobs becomes available? Or should I just develop it all for faster jobs then go back to urbanizing?

Yes and no. If your state has a lot of arable land, then probably not, as filling it with farms will produce more lower pop group workers (even with a high SoL). If your state doesn't, maxing out it isn't so bad. But it also depends on do you have other states? You can use one state to farm, one state to resource gather and a third state to manufacture and assign appropriate decrees to maximize these industry types by state.

But filling up arable land into full on farms shouldn't even be a priority thought. It's just something that should happen as you play and need the raw resources produced more in bulk from the farms.

Arable land also pays crap and barely produces good. So relying on that for your raw resources is a bad idea.

Also high SoL won't kill your industry. It does make it hard to find qualified workers who are willing to work for a decent wage if they're accustomed to having an even higher wage. BUUUUT if you built your economy and society up with stability this isn't even a potential problem at all. Ignore LxDK14's comment about high SoL killing your economy. Guy just wants to troll post in every thread.

[equinox1911]

As soon as you have any kind of welfare, which is the time when you can feasably get to that immigration issue bc that is what broadly increases SoL, they stop demoting to peasants and keep bein unemployed.
There is a sliding scale but a 15 wealth (SoL) unemployed pop will essentially never become a peasant. I havent looked into the cut offs but they would to errode their wealth over time until they reach 8 or 9 before they consider doing that.

But if your aim is to make GDP number big, then getting those ppl to work is better than high paying work. But it depends on market conditions. if the farms dont make a profit its a bad idea, aka if the price for tobaco is -30% it wont work, if its anywhere close or above 0 its fine.
Its a cheap way to get people off the street, but if your radicals are in check you can ignore it. On the other hand lategame ecos always suffer from a lack of input goods...

[Supply Slut]

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Don't bother. High SoL will kill your industry. I'm not joking. Some factories with high SoL can't produce enough goods on any combination of production methods to stay profitable. For example - power plants.

I have not encountered this problem. 40 years into the game and my nation (Haiti) has the highest SoL in the world. Industries that are below average still hire as long as they’re nominally profitable. Not sure if this is because the pops expected SoL is still considerably lower or because high immigration is causing a lot of pops with nothing to do to accept subpar jobs.

Only a few times has an industry failed to hire despite labor availability, and usually I can resolve that by subsidizing long enough for occupancy to reach 100%, then stopping the subsidy. Wages stay below my average but still better than no jobs.

[equinox1911]

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Don't bother. High SoL will kill your industry. I'm not joking. Some factories with high SoL can't produce enough goods on any combination of production methods to stay profitable. For example - power plants.

That is flat out not true. What you are running into is a problem of relative competitive advantage. Usually happens if you have a lot of unincorporated states in your market, the industries there do not pay taxes and thus are more competitive.

[Zero, Dark Knight]

To add to above; anything which increases your minimum wage (government laws, workers laws, etc, social security, all the like.) is also a huge killer of industry profit in incorporated states, also.

[LzDK14]

Originally posted by Supply Slut:

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Don't bother. High SoL will kill your industry. I'm not joking. Some factories with high SoL can't produce enough goods on any combination of production methods to stay profitable. For example - power plants.

I have not encountered this problem. 40 years into the game and my nation (Haiti) has the highest SoL in the world. Industries that are below average still hire as long as they’re nominally profitable. Not sure if this is because the pops expected SoL is still considerably lower or because high immigration is causing a lot of pops with nothing to do to accept subpar jobs.

Only a few times has an industry failed to hire despite labor availability, and usually I can resolve that by subsidizing long enough for occupancy to reach 100%, then stopping the subsidy. Wages stay below my average but still better than no jobs.

Your industry is still ♥♥♥♥. In 3+ billion GDP your states are full of uneployed pops with huge ammount of work space available. With NO uneployment benefits.

Power plants are just so badly balanced, that this is the first industry that's observed on.

[Supply Slut]

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Originally posted by Supply Slut:

I have not encountered this problem. 40 years into the game and my nation (Haiti) has the highest SoL in the world. Industries that are below average still hire as long as they’re nominally profitable. Not sure if this is because the pops expected SoL is still considerably lower or because high immigration is causing a lot of pops with nothing to do to accept subpar jobs.

Only a few times has an industry failed to hire despite labor availability, and usually I can resolve that by subsidizing long enough for occupancy to reach 100%, then stopping the subsidy. Wages stay below my average but still better than no jobs.

Your industry is still ♥♥♥♥. In 3+ billion GDP your states are full of uneployed pops with huge ammount of work space available. With NO uneployment benefits.

Power plants are just so badly balanced, that this is the first industry that's observed on.

No lmao. I didn’t give any of those details about the economy. Haiti is #1 in GDP per capita, #9 in GDP total, SoL is #1. It is heavily industrialized, thanks to British market access - #2 global production in clothing, groceries, electricity, and a healthy smattering of other industries.

I only started building a ton of agricultural buildings when the number of peasants started exploding. I have no welfare institution whatsoever.

[equinox1911]

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Since you have fixed prices.

Gonna ignore you personal attacks and just explain the game.
Goods have a BASE price, that is augmented by demand/supply from -75% to +75% on a per market and per province basis.

And if you cant make a 3 billion GDP economy without loads of unemployed, you my friend, are simply not as good at the game as you think you are!

[Supply Slut]

Originally posted by equinox1911:

As soon as you have any kind of welfare, which is the time when you can feasably get to that immigration issue bc that is what broadly increases SoL, they stop demoting to peasants and keep bein unemployed.
There is a sliding scale but a 15 wealth (SoL) unemployed pop will essentially never become a peasant. I havent looked into the cut offs but they would to errode their wealth over time until they reach 8 or 9 before they consider doing that.

But if your aim is to make GDP number big, then getting those ppl to work is better than high paying work. But it depends on market conditions. if the farms dont make a profit its a bad idea, aka if the price for tobaco is -30% it wont work, if its anywhere close or above 0 its fine.
Its a cheap way to get people off the street, but if your radicals are in check you can ignore it. On the other hand lategame ecos always suffer from a lack of input goods...

This is more or less what I was thinking about. The numbers seem to support filling up arable land. My GDP per capita and SoL is stagnant since I started focusing on that, but both were #1 (and still are) and my total GDP is still skyrocketing. Agriculture is the only option able to keep pace with the 2-5k immigrants coming each week, but it’s also about to be completely filled out in both states I have. Still seems better overall bc peasants suck.

[LzDK14]

Originally posted by equinox1911:

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Since you have fixed prices.

Gonna ignore you personal attacks and just explain the game.
Goods have a BASE price, that is augmented by demand/supply from -75% to +75% on a per market and per province basis.

And if you cant make a 3 billion GDP economy without loads of unemployed, you my friend, are simply not as good at the game as you think you are!

Oh, I do. 3Bil GDP, 2mil@week income on proportionate taxes. Don't worry about me "getting good", since I'm already pretty f-g awesome.

But, at the same time there are pplants that can't sell tricity on a profit while there is a 50% DEFICIT on the market.
Why - because tricity has a fixed price. In economical simulation, prices on it would skyrocket, causing industry depending on it to shut down, thus bringin market to equlibrium. In V3 - it about 15% more expensive. That's it.
So we have businesses not competing for products, but at the same time, same businesses somehow are producing same amount of goods. How is that even possible in the first place?

There is such thing as elastisity of good. Tricity is not elastic, since (among other things) it cannot be interchanged to anything else. You can't feed a liter of oit to electric motor. But for some freakish reason, tricity producers aren't increasing market prices for thier good. How does that make any sense??!

Are you an EU economical advisor by any chance?

[equinox1911]

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Originally posted by equinox1911:

Gonna ignore you personal attacks and just explain the game.
Goods have a BASE price, that is augmented by demand/supply from -75% to +75% on a per market and per province basis.

And if you cant make a 3 billion GDP economy without loads of unemployed, you my friend, are simply not as good at the game as you think you are!

Oh, I do. 3Bil GDP, 2mil@week income on proportionate taxes. Don't worry about me "getting good", since I'm already pretty f-g awesome.

But, at the same time there are pplant that can't sell tricity while there is a 50% DEFICIT on the market.
Why - because tricity has a fixed price. In economical simulation, prices on it would skyrocket, causing industry depending on it to shut down, thus bringin market to equlibrium. In V3 - it about 30% more expensive. That's it.
So we have businesses not competing for products, but at the same time, same busenesses some how are producing same amount of goods. How is that even possible in the first place?
Are you an EU economical advisor by any chance?

Just gonna leave this here:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2893687813

What even is tricity?

[LzDK14]

Originally posted by equinox1911:

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Oh, I do. 3Bil GDP, 2mil@week income on proportionate taxes. Don't worry about me "getting good", since I'm already pretty f-g awesome.

But, at the same time there are pplant that can't sell tricity while there is a 50% DEFICIT on the market.
Why - because tricity has a fixed price. In economical simulation, prices on it would skyrocket, causing industry depending on it to shut down, thus bringin market to equlibrium. In V3 - it about 30% more expensive. That's it.
So we have businesses not competing for products, but at the same time, same busenesses some how are producing same amount of goods. How is that even possible in the first place?
Are you an EU economical advisor by any chance?

Just gonna leave this here:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2893687813

What even is tricity?

One of my abandoned games
https://imgur.com/7BKvLOe

3bil GDP, low taxes, 5lvl of slaries for gov and mil, 7k in construction@week. -2.3m@week and still good economy, 320mil in credit line (not used, 17mil in reserve).
And I still consider this one to be fubared.

Still want to try to compare your joystick to mine? Really?

https://imgur.com/4lSwnzV
https://imgur.com/Uj17G07
82k unemployed with workspace for at least 25k. State also has other industris that can't maintain profitability under high sol.

[equinox1911]

Originally posted by LzDK14:

Still want to try to compare your joystick to mine? Really?

You said its not possible to have a huge eco without massive unemployment, i showed you that it is possible.

Btw that screenshot is from my wc attempt i got bored with and is a backup from when i borked my eco for a while, bc it is possible to create demand for thousands of radios and telephones without the tech to build em :D
With the idea of a telephone all my admin workers decided they cant in any way shape or form be productive without them! Now that is a game design fail.

Edit:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2893700896