Does trade affect the GDP at all?

[Ilhan]

I have never seen any visible affect of high rates of export on the economy. It only seems to balance the goods prices.

[casual]

GDP is just the sum of goods produced minus goods used as industry input (valued at your market price).

High export should increase GDP, assuming that without that export your market price would have hit -75% floor. (same for imports if your market price without them is at +75% ceiling).

As an experiment, what if you cancel your export route, does GDP change after the weekly tick?

[Ilhan]

Originally posted by casual:

GDP is just the sum of goods produced minus goods used as industry input (valued at your market price).

High export should increase GDP, assuming that without that export your market price would have hit -75% floor. (same for imports if your market price without them is at +75% ceiling).

As an experiment, what if you cancel your export route, does GDP change after the weekly tick?

No, it only changes my money balance.

[Ilhan]

I can't comprehend this game.
I cannot increase the amount of capitalists I have. Also, should I employ mechanized production methods even though I have 60 million peasants in my country?

[Azunai]

You have to switch the production methods of your factories and mines to the more modern methods unlocked by research to get capitalists.

The starting production method for most industrial buildings (for example "crude tools" for the tool workshops) has shopkeepers as owners. Once you switch to a better method, the ownership also flips to capitalists.

[Ilhan]

Originally posted by casual:

GDP is just the sum of goods produced minus goods used as industry input (valued at your market price).

High export should increase GDP, assuming that without that export your market price would have hit -75% floor. (same for imports if your market price without them is at +75% ceiling).

As an experiment, what if you cancel your export route, does GDP change after the weekly tick?

Exportation should affect the GDP significantly but it doesn't seem to in this game

[🌹KomradeKarl🌹]

If by exporting a good, you increase its price, then the GDP should go up

[Ilhan]

Originally posted by 🌹KomradeKarl🌹:

If by exporting a good, you increase its price, then the GDP should go up

Increase its price within my market or globally?

[Alex]

Originally posted by ilhanmete:

Originally posted by 🌹KomradeKarl🌹:

If by exporting a good, you increase its price, then the GDP should go up

Increase its price within my market or globally?

Your market, obviously.

[Dave Reckoning]

I think the main point here is this:

If you want your factories to make money and employ people, you have to sell the goods they make.

If you're only selling to your own country / market, you're limiting the amount of stuff you can sell, which means you're also limiting the amount of stuff you can profitably make (i.e. your GDP).

As a secondary effect, if you're limiting the amount of stuff you can profitably make, you're limiting the number of people you can employ, and how much they earn. Which in turn limits the amount of stuff they buy (from you), and further limits the amount of stuff you can profitably make and sell within your own market (i.e. your GDP).

So, export markets are always a good thing, and as a strategy you should be trying to end up making, selling and exporting as much as you possibly can; even to the point where it's only you that makes anything and you supply the whole rest of the world with everything it needs.

(N.B. One of the effects of colonialism (as I understand it) was that european countries took raw materials from around the world, brought it back home to turn into manufactured goods, and then sold those manufactured goods back out into the world. So in this aspect, I think the game is realistic enough.)

[🌹KomradeKarl🌹]

Originally posted by ilhanmete:

Originally posted by 🌹KomradeKarl🌹:

If by exporting a good, you increase its price, then the GDP should go up

Increase its price within my market or globally?

within your market

[TasteDasRainbow]

high export rates to good price point markets will mean all the people working those jobs make more money, improving their SoL as well as providing you with more tax/dividend income.

[Ilhan]

Originally posted by Dave Reckoning:

I think the main point here is this:

If you want your factories to make money and employ people, you have to sell the goods they make.

If you're only selling to your own country / market, you're limiting the amount of stuff you can sell, which means you're also limiting the amount of stuff you can profitably make (i.e. your GDP).

As a secondary effect, if you're limiting the amount of stuff you can profitably make, you're limiting the number of people you can employ, and how much they earn. Which in turn limits the amount of stuff they buy (from you), and further limits the amount of stuff you can profitably make and sell within your own market (i.e. your GDP).

So, export markets are always a good thing, and as a strategy you should be trying to end up making, selling and exporting as much as you possibly can; even to the point where it's only you that makes anything and you supply the whole rest of the world with everything it needs.

(N.B. One of the effects of colonialism (as I understand it) was that european countries took raw materials from around the world, brought it back home to turn into manufactured goods, and then sold those manufactured goods back out into the world. So in this aspect, I think the game is realistic enough.)

Thanks. Also, should I have interventionism or laissez-faire?

[Dave Reckoning]

Originally posted by ilhanmete:

Thanks. Also, should I have interventionism or laissez-faire?

I think I'd like to answer your question like this.....

You ask "should !....?" and that is the crux of the matter.

Imagine there is a spectrum of "ways to play". At one end of that spectrum is a play-style that involves total control of everything that's happening in your country, and indeed everything that's happening in the whole world. It involves min-maxing. It involves "winning" and "losing". And it also involves getting frustrated (or even angry) when everything doesn't go exactly as you want.

At the other end of the spectrum is a play-style that involves simply sitting back and watching what the game-world does, without your intervention. Just watching how the world "thinks" and how that evolves over time, if left to it's own devices. This play-style involves curiosity about what's happening and why. It involves allowing and enjoying the weird things that the pops do. It involves discovering what causes those actions and where they lead. And it involves very little stressing - there is no "winning or losing", no frustration, just curiosity and learning.

We all sit somewhere on that spectrum of play-styles. And where we sit on it can evolve over time, given openness to what you actually enjoy doing and how you want to "be" as you play.

(Personally, I'm a bit in the middle. I like to be quite involved in the game world, influencing things in a strategic way, understanding and learning what "big-picture" things influence each other, and how I can make strategic adjustments to guide the development and evolution of the country, society and economy in my game-world. The min-maxing, and all the stress and frustration that goes with it, is not for me. I just don't enjoy it. It's not wrong, and others seem to enjoy all that, but it's not for me. I want to understand, learn and be open to the game-world, not simply to control everything and rage when I see my own incompetence!)

So, your question "should I....?" really all depends on how you want to play,

If you want to "win" &/or min-max there may be an answer to your question. However, what happens in the game is so complicated that your specific detailed game situation will almost certainly affect the "best" answer to your question, in a way that means that no-one else here can really know enough about your game situation and what you specifically are trying to achieve, to give you that "best" answer.

So, my advice would be, just relax as you play. See what interests you in the game-world and investigate it, play with it (!) to see if you can figure out how it works. Make it a problem-solving exercise, where the "winning" is gained from the pleasure of now understanding something you didn't understand before, because you've worked at it and figured it out yourself. Obviously, if you have specific questions you can't figure out, and we all do, go and research them, either yourself or online through YouTube or the forums.

And all this means, in my view, that there really is no "should"; particularly in this game. So, unfortunately I cannot give you a specific answer, other than the above.

The answer I give myself though is usually "go for Laissez-Faire (LF)". LF means something like "let them do what they want" in French. For me, letting my Pops do what they want is a good thing (rather than just trying to order them about all the time, all 70 Million of them (!)). Who the hell wants the stress of telling everyone exactly what to do all the time? And getting steamed up if they don't immediately do it? In my chosen play-style, I can still influence the strategic direction of things, by overall political and economic guidance, but my Pops put in all the work for me. And if it all ends in disaster, well then it's not my fault, I can just step back and blame them! Just like people all do in the real world.

[xX_Sexy_Abe_Lincoln_Xx]

trade is needed mid game to increase your gdp. since you wont have enough people gainfully employeed to sell to your own populus. once your gdp is up from the midgame you will be able to increase it without trade, but it is still handy for min-maxxing the economy.

Another strategy ive used is the wood early game strat which requires a stupidly large amount of convoys to sell to any great power. It increases your gdp by a large amount really fast at the expense of your convoys and reliance on another nation's market

[alexander.julian.erhard]

Originally posted by casual:

GDP is just the sum of goods produced minus goods used as industry input (valued at your market price).

High export should increase GDP, assuming that without that export your market price would have hit -75% floor. (same for imports if your market price without them is at +75% ceiling).

As an experiment, what if you cancel your export route, does GDP change after the weekly tick?

Importing goods above 0% and exporting goods below 0% relative price should generally increase GDP, because
-If a good is above 0%, you consume more than you use, so by importing you overall reduce the input price in consuming buildings more than you reduce the output price of producing buildings.
-If a good is below 0%, you produce more than you use, so by exporting you raise the output value producing buildings more than you raise the input price for consuming buildings.