The Effect of a Growing Population

As I was reading Chapter 24 of Colander based on the concept of growth, I was wondering what the effect of an increasing population would be on an economy. According to Colander, "The reason high population growth presents a problem for economic growth is that providing sufficient capital and education for everyone becomes difficult." Therefore, each individual worker would be forced to support a larger number of people (because an increasing population means that more dependent people (those who are too young or too old to work) would be present). This would lead to a decreasing per capita income, thus resulting in slower growth. Therefore, while one's country may be more industrialized or developed at a certain time, it may not be growing at the quickest pace as a result of an extremely high population. In other words, a newly developing country could be growing at a quicker pace than the pace at which the United States is currently.

An increasing population results in an increasing demand as well. This would lead to the necessity of new technologies for mass production in order to increase output. In Civ IV, the concept of an increasing population is not truly represented. While it may portray how happy or upset a city is, is it really affecting your economy? When a window pops up saying that one of my smaller cities is upset due to lack of attention, it fails to negatively impact my economy as a whole. You can simply ignore them and let them continue to be upset. In reality, if the President of the United States were to ignore the demands of an increasing population, the economy would truly be affected. Riots could occur, and who knows what else. Once again, there is an extremely important concept of the economy that is not depicted in Civ IV.

In Civ IV, an increasing population does not affect the growth of your civilization. While Colander offers several ways to avoid a decrease in growth (such as increasing trade and improving educational policies), it is a necessary action in the game. Therefore, while my industrial revolution may have occurred way before every other civilization, my growth does not slow down as a result of an increased population. The concept of per capita growth is not depicted in the game. This is unfortunate for the developing countries, for they are incapable of catching up to me in terms of growth. My growth rate does not slow down as a result of the increased amount of people. This only allows me to further continue my civilization domination, for increasing my trade allows me to snatch technologies and other benefits early on, thus allowing me to establish an enormous gap between myself and the second closest civilization. I am very pleased that my growth rate does not slow down as a result of the massive increase in population in this game, for it simply allows me to absolutely obliterate all other countries.

While the game does inform the player when the population reaches a large number, it does not depict the effects of the growing population. It is evident that an increasing population leads to more demand. However, the demands of this massive population are not portrayed in the game. Also, as the population increases, the amount of space becomes limited. More people are being crammed into a society that may not be able to hold them. This would lead to a problem of overpopulation. With such a great amount of people in a certain area, it is obvious that negative impacts would begin to arise. Waste could be created, the destruction of land, and even murder. Are any of these concepts present in Civ IV? No, once again, a concept of real life is not depicted.

What really leaves me clueless, however, is the fact that global warming is portrayed in the game. Every once in a while, a depressing, intimidating bell rings, and a small note pops up in the top left: Global warming has occurred in this city! Hmm.....while my population seems to have no effect on anything else in the game, they can still cause global warming. While scientists have come to a conclusion that global warming truly is occurring (as a result of the increasing human population), I do not see why it is necessary for it to be in Civ IV. The creators of this game decided to fail to demonstrate the common impacts on the environment caused by an increasing population, but they decided to save a nice little spot for global warming. Also, when global warming strikes a city in my civilization, it doesn't even impact the environment! It simply tells me that my country is being hit by global warming, but thankfully, nothing bad is happening as a result of it. Wow...good thing an increasing population does absolutely nothing to my economy in this game.

The population of the world has a significant impact on its environments. More importantly, an increasing population has an ENORMOUS impact on the economy. Unfortunately, these impacts are not represented in Civ IV. If they were, it is likely that all of our civilizations would be much less successful, and we would actually be forced to act as a real leader of a country. Instead, we get to ignore the people of our civilization as if they don't exist and do whatever the hell we want. While my cities are demanding more farmland and food, I can simply ignore them and do what I love to do: declare war on others and fight. Imagine a world where the population has no effect on neither the economy nor the environment.....what a game!

Growth

The growth of an economy may be considered to be the single most important concept in order to determine its success or failure. Growth is defined as an increase in the amount of goods and services an economy produces. After having read Ch. 24 of Colander, it is clear that several concepts contribute to the amount of growth within an economy. Specialization, for example, increases productivity, thus increasing growth. Therefore, this is why I have decided to specialize each city in something (as I've mentioned in previous posts). According to Colander, there are five sources of growth: Capital accumulation, available resources, growth-compatible institutions, technological development, and entrepreneurship.

In Civ IV, not all of these sources are clearly present. However, the availability of resources and technological development are undoubtedly a key factor in the success of your civilization. For example, if your civilization is located in an extremely beneficial area (such as the Fertile Crescent), several resources are available. As the game progresses, explorers and workers will continue to find more and more resources as well. For example, a worker can construct a mine, a plantation, a camp, or several other "institutions" that create resources such as oil, fur, food, etc. Also, the presence of water along your borders is an important resource (this is why one's location is key).

On page 570 in Colander, figure 24-2 portrays the importance of souces of GDP Growth. It is evident that labor and technology are the two sources which contribute most significantly towards growth. Therefore, it is imperative that your workers (the labor aspect) are constantly in action, finding resources and constructing several institutions that will ultimately contribute to the growth of your civilization. Also, it is important that a very large amount of time be dedicated towards technological advancement in the game, for according to figure 24-2, it is the single-most important source of growth.

According to the new growth theory, the role of technology is the primary source of growth. This is not a theory which can be argued. In Civ IV, the technological advancements are clearly the most important, for they all lead to extremely necessary sources upon which one's economy is based. The small description on page 575 of Colander demonstrates the important of technology: Technology --> Investment --> Further technological advancement --> Growth. This is the reason why dedicating as much time as possible towards the aspect of technological advancement in Civ IV is the most important (at least in my mind). Also on page 575, Colander shows the effect of technological growth on the production function (an abstraction that shows the relationship between the quantity of inputs used in production and the quantity of output resulting from the production) and the PPC. The technological growth clearly increases the output of both the PPC and the production function, thus resulting in the growth of the economy as a whole.

A final comment I would like to add is that both of these sources of growth can be obtained by means of trade. As I've mentioned before, trade is one of the most important concepts of the game, for it allows you to possibly receive more resources and new technology. Therefore, it is evident that trade can be the beginning of a long chain of steps that leads to growth, for it can lead to availability of resources which can lead to more land which can lead to more power, and so on. Trade can also lead to technological advancement which ultimately leads to growth as well. I can only speak of trade and its significant impact so much, but I have realized that it is truly one of the most important aspects of Civ IV.

While there are several other sources of growth, I simply believe that these two (technological advancement and available resources) are the only ones which clearly play a role in Civ IV. By contributing a significant amount of time to these two concepts, one's civilization will be able to grow at a rapid pace, thus ameliorating the living standards of your people, and increasing output. From here, it is simply a long chain of beneficial results, ultimately resulting in the growth of your economy as a whole.

WAR

I have entered a war with two different countries simultaneously once again. As I have mentioned in earlier posts, my approach to this dilemma is to destroy the weaker country initially; once I conquer the weaker, I will focus all attention to the stronger country. However, as the stronger country continues to absolutely dominate my unattended land, it is not truly hurting my economy by any means. The Germans (the superior country) are taking over my weaker cities. Whenever they attempt to conquer a more developed, industrialized city, I am able to fend them off and re-energize my troops before another attack. Therefore, the concept of war is very unrealistic in Civ IV. When a country is at war, its economy is being negatively impacted by several sources. It dedicates billions of dollars to war, thus effecting the surrounding cities. When your main city, and other relatively industrialized cities devote all their attention to war, they are unable to specialize in what they ought to produce. For example, if your city which specializes in culture is near a war border, it would be sensible to produce military tanks and stealth bombers here so that it does not become destroyed. While in reality this would harm an economy, it fails to do so in this game. It actually benefits you, because it provides defense for the city.

Therefore, in Civ IV, war does not really significantly impact your economy, unless of course you lose the war. If the U.S. was at war with Iraq and Germany simultaneously, this tag-team would absolutely destroy us. If we dedicated all of our attention to Iraq, Germany would have its way with us and we would all be speaking German in the future. Also, the game simply obliterates the existence of civilizations when you take over all their cities. This obviously does not occur in real life. While I do enjoy going to war in this game, it is simply not realistic by any means. The only way it depicts real life is when you are one of the extremely weak countries (which I never have been), for the other countries are able to take over your cities in a long, slow process, eventually leading to your ultimate demise.

War is the most entertaining concept of this game. Although its effects are very unrealistic in terms of an economy, I still enjoy going to war with several countries simultaneously, for it allows the game to move along more quickly. It is just like other video games: fun to play but unrealistic. I, however, am not complaining. I am having the time of my life trading blows with dominant countries in Civ IV. Not realistic, no problem. It's fun.

My New Game

I have just now begun a new game of Civ IV, and as I mentioned earlier, I was going to base this civilization on the concept of Heilbroner's explanation of the Industrial Revolution. I would initiate trade early with every civilization (particularly massive amounts of money), and declare war on the weak. Once again, I played as the Persian Empire, for I have come to like them. I felt that if I was able to obtain a huge sum of money, I would be able to dedicate this amount to the production of goods within my civilization. Once I developed a strong enough military with my surplus of money, I would declare war on a weak country. This would allow me to obtain even more money...thus allowing me to further industrialize my civilization.
Well, let's actually talk about the game. I immediately began trade with every country, demanding money for concepts which did not truly seem important to me. I also focused on exploration, for if you send each explorer across the map, it is possible to discover money and very productive areas (such as the Fertile Crescent) where I could base my civilization. By trading for money, and by obtaining money from exploring, I was able to dedicate a good amount of funds toward my military and economy. I was already beginning to construct a powerful military within a couple of turns, and therefore I declared war on the weak. I took over their entire civilization within three turns. I have so much money now that I do not know what to do with it. It seems as if my Industrial Revolution will occur within the next few turns.
My concentration on the amount of money, combined with my approach of specialization in each country will allow me to become so dominant that it will not even be close. My main city specializes in military, my second strongest city focuses on the economy, and the rest of my cities dedicate their time towards a single concept. This will allow me to establish products of comparative advantage in each city; therefore when I trade between cities, my entire civilization will benefit. This will only lead to taking fewer turns to produce something in every concept (such as military, economy, culture, etc.), thus allowing my Industrial Revolution to occur extremely soon. I have a feeling that this will be the absolute most dominant game of Civ IV in the history of the game...we'll just have to wait and see.

True Success

I just finished the game which I had been playing for the past month and a half. The teaming up of Egypt and Germany was not enough to stop the great Persian civilization. My plan worked to perfection: I ignored Frederick and his German domination over my weaker cities, and concentrated on Hatshepsut's territory. I eventually captured all of her territory, leaving only Frederick in the way of my path to complete domination. After retaking my smaller cities, I attacked him with what seemed to be about 500 tanks. He had no chance. Civilization domination was achieved.
I am now beginning to start a new game, and after studying the Industrial Revolution, I have come to ponder the representation of this era in Civ IV. Knowing that industrialization first began in England due to a variety of reasons, it has become my goal to become like these men who were able to become the first to experience this period of immense growth. By having a wealthy civilization (whether it be by winning wars, trading, or exploring), one is able to have a stable environment. This stability is the foundation of starting an industrial revolution. By adopting new techniques (or philosophies in Civ IV), or by adopting a new form of government, one can be well on his way to a boom in production. Also, as your population expands, the demand will increase. This increase in demand will be a cornerstone of the initialization of the industrial revolution as well. As a result of these factors, it is very possible that your production will be able to increase significantly. This is represented in the game by the appearance of railroads, factories, and machinery. These all lead to greater things such as increased production at a much quicker pace. This will basically increase your civilization's output exponentially. For example, when one is able to construct a factory, this will lead to the possibility of coal, steel, iron, etc. These small advancements eventually allow this civilization to be the most dominant in the country by producing stealth bombers more quickly, or even tanks and nuclear bombs.
Therefore, it is imperative that you get off to the right start in a new game of Civ IV. If not, your industrial revolution will occur much later than others, and you will be left in the dust. In my new game, I plan on declaring war relatively early on a small, weak country. This will allow me to gain much more money while also expanding my territory simultaneously. This leaves room for exploration (and the possibility of more money). I will also focus more on trading than I ever have before, making sure that I am receiving something that will truly benefit me in the future. Hopefully, this will lead to bigger and better things, and I will be the civilization experiencing the industrial revolution first. This will only lead to one thing: Civilization Domination.

Comparative Advantage

I haven't posted in quite some time due to mid-terms, but now that I actually have some time, I am able to express my opinion on the main concept of this game: Comparative advantage. I have realized that it is not intelligent to construct the same building in every city of your civilization (such as a colosseum(culture) or a laboratory(science)). Instead, one ought to focus on developping a culture capital, a capital of technology, and a capital of military within different cities. When you focus on one thing (such as military), it will not take as long in that city to produce a modern armor or a stealth bomber. However, if you were to try to maintain a strong balance of military, culture, and technology within the same city, every single aspect would take much longer. If you simply specialize in the production of one thing, your production speed would increase significantly. It is similar to the example given in class between Muffinstan and Baconia. Each country had its comparative advantage, and therefore, was able to produce more of one thing than another. Say you have 5 main cities within your civilization. One ought to specialize in military, one in technology, one in culture, one in the concept of the economy, and another in science or education. The opportunity cost will become much more favorable as a whole. Say you need to produce a granary. Would you prefer to take 75 turns in order to produce one in your military capital or would you prefer to take 2 turns in producing it in your capital of economic production? Easy decision. This is exactly what should be done in Civ IV, and then, it is imperative that you construct railroads and roads in order to trade within your cities (and we know how that allows one's PPC to improve overall). So rather than trying to balance all the aspects of the game within each city, simply specialize in one aspect in each city. Your production speed will increase, and you will be able to establish a dominant civilization. Then, when you are able to trade and become a more developed civilization, you will become as dominant as I am in this game.

Almost there.....

In my previous post, I mentioned that I was in the process of overtaking the entire world. However, Frederick was delaying my progress. He continues to take over my smaller, weaker cities, but I am rapidly destroying the Egyptian civilization. Hatshepsut has no clue what hit her. My modern armor tanks are zooming through her cities, destroying them with ease. I find it to be advantageous that I am taking over major cities while losing smaller, less important ones which serve no purpose to my progress. As soon as I destroy Hatshepsut, however, those small cities that were taken over will be mine once again. Frederick is dealing with seven different kinds of smoke...and I feel that realtively soon it is going to destroy him.
A concept which I actually took notice of while playing this game is the concept of opportunity cost. While at war with these two powerful civilizations, I suddenly realized that I need to spend more time on my military if I want to end up defeating Frederick. What would help me more in the process of owning the entire world: building a courthouse to help my economy or building a modern armor tank in order to protect my cities and take over others simultaneously. If I have the protection, I will be able to hold off the enemy until they are destroyed, and then I can focus on my economy. This has to deal with the comparison of guns and butter. Thankfully,
my economy is already strong due to the attention I dedicated towards it at the beginning, so now I am able to devote much of my production towards guns. One must be very careful in the approach to this, however, for if you produce too many guns without focusing on butter, you're economy is a hell hole. However, if you focus on butter too much and do not pay attention to your military, you can kiss your civilization goodbye. From an ideal perspective, one would achieve productive efficiency (as I did), receiving as much output as possible from a certain amount of inputs/resources. I would recommend that the concept of opportunity cost be carefully watched, for it truly plays a key role in the success or failure of your civilization.