Bureaucrats + New programs =

[Snall]

Instead of having each new program adding to the upkeep of bureaucrats (for doing more work, etc) I think it would be better if, for most programs, the nation paid one lump sum to enact the programs - paying for new paperwork, manuals, advertisements, incentives, whatever. Only a very few programs should really add the bureaucratic upkeep- perhaps giving land grants, etc would add a constant upkeep to show the offering of lands.

Imo this is better for gameplay AND realism.

 

[Bezborg]

regarding the concept of more money for more work... where does this come from? Is it so in your country? It sure as hell ain't in mine :rofl:

regarding your proposal, it's a bit vague, could you elaborate more please?

 

[Snall]

The idea is an idea King or Johan posted for the game. I would rather pay a lump sum to enact a new program instead of just paying the bureaucrats more as that could get out of hand for gameplay and realism. Another idea is you might need a few more beaurocrats to handle a lot of new programs.

 

[Ignudo]

Another idea is you might need a few more beaurocrats to handle a lot of new programs.

This!

The more money for each bureaucrat as suggested by King doesn't make much sense, indeed. I think the way to model it is that the efficiency (I believe, I remember King refering to something like that) by which each program is handled should depend on the number of bureaucrats compared to the number of programs (programs should of course be weighted according to their dimension).
For example, having an efficiency rating of only 60 percent for unemployment benefits would mean that the POPs would only get 60 pound from each hundred pound spent by the government on this particular program.
For other programs like safety regulations at the workplace the effects of this measure (whatever they are) could just be deflated by the same factor.

 

[Eternal]

Am I wrong or in Vicky 2 does the beaurocrat maintenance slider actually pay the beaurocrat POPs and POPs change job according to economic benefit? If so the end result will be more beaurocrats as a result of increasing spending. Not exactly the ideal or most realistic way for it to work, but good enough for me.

 

[Garius]

Its seems you have not been to Spain where most of the people tend to work as civil servants ( sad it sounds, but it is real).

 

[ikki]

Its seems you have not been to Spain where most of the people tend to work as civil servants ( sad it sounds, but it is real).

What is your percentage?

In finland 1,1 million private sector +900.000 public (other 3.000.000 are elderly, children, students, unemployed, welfare migrants or otherwise out of the system. Officially just some 200.000 unemployed, real number likely way over 700.000)

Well this was before the depression.
During the depression i believe over 100.000 private sector people have lost their jobs..