Patriotic Marines
-----Original Message-----
From: CHRIS BUTCHKO <cbutchko@cftc.gov>
To: g2-list@pbm.com <g2-list@pbm.com>
Date: Monday, January 26, 1998 3:55 PM
Subject: re:Re: Trade in G2
>Sent by:Jim Gunn <jim.gunn@autodesk.com>
> I would be more in favor of having an option for a player who controls a
>city to place a tax on trade within the city at his/her discretion, such
>that:
>Bob, who has just garrisoned province [foo] with city [foobar] can have
>one
>of his units issue a command like "citytax foobar 15", which would have
>the
>effect of levying a 15% tax on all trade transactions in [foobar]. The tax
>rate would be posted in the city and all visitors would be able to see it.
>----
>Okay, let me just say that I agree with Rodgers that the balance, as far
>as a steady income, has changed from castle ownership to trade. I think
>that more points out the marginal nature of trade in G1 than it does an
>unbalance in G2.
>I used to know medieval history fairly well, but ask someone who currently
>knows it to confirm that you made more money from trade than from taxing
>the serfs.
>As far as an automatic trade tax, I'd be against it. Maybe if it was
>fleshed out, I'd change my mind, but anything game-administrated like that
>is uninteresting and adds very little other than welfare for castle
>owners.
>My opinion might change if there was some wrinkle to this that made it
>somethig that had consequences:
>1) The tax is only collected if a noble is stationed in the garrison
>issuring the tax order, and if the trade "tax pay" flag is not set to pay
>by the trader the noble and garrison attack the trader. The noble could
>set up to enforce tax only on certain days, like day 1 and 30, and so
>something useful the rest of the time.
>2) Concealed traders don't pay the tax.
>3) The amount of the tax is set by the castle owner (per Jim), and the
>owner and trader's tax flags must match- like the bid/ask numbers in
>trade. The owner could set 100% tax or a given range- 0 - 50%? Tax
>revolts would be fun, but not likely to happen.
>4) The taxing entity gives something of value to the trader. (I currently
>have no idea what this might be.)
>Anybody have more/better ideas?
>"Vote no on castle welfare."
>