Advantages

Why do some people seem to have the best luck from the start? Why does it seem like no matter what you do you will never be as good as some people in certain areas. Its like they were better from the moment they were born. And if you think about it, they really are. Same goes with an entire civilization. Now I know we read about this so long ago but I thought about it and really it still pertains to economic thought now as it has for centuries.
I started a game as the Persians recently and found by the map generator's grace that i had abundant natural resources to start the game with. Now me, be ing the militaristic person I am, I just used this opportunity to get strong fast and ally with who I though I could get the most out of and began to heckle the other civilizations within my realistic shpere of influence. This game I found much easier at the same difficulty than the game I played just before. I began to then wonder why. I thought 'hmm, something is different. I mean I did all the same stuff. I just gather...I hunted in th......I min...wait I had more to begin with'. I did nothing different. That was it, i didn't work my success to fluition but rather I was blessed.
The same thing happened with the fertile crescent in real life (unfortunately for them it didn't carry for too long like it did for me in CIV 4). You have these medditeraanean group thriving because of the area and they just happenen to have been placed there by chance and begin the world's first real organized peoples.
In life it happenes. Some people are 'Rollins rich'. I'm not condeming them for it but rather just mentioning it. They did nothing to get what they have other than being born. Pure chance that they were of the parents they were.
With all this said, it must be countered to fulfill the whole truth. With sufficirent hard work and cunning and good decision-making you can advance beyond what limitations might bew presented. Just as well, if you are well-endowed you can protect it and continue to grow. Just like in my game, I was on top and stayed there but I did have upsurpers from unlikely places because they wanted it. So in the end, it is based on a lot of luck, but once that trial period ends then you must take it that second step further.

s and d

The most recent thing we went over in class was supply and demand. A staple concept for any real economics class anywhere. Also this is a staple for anything that involves any facet of an economic activity in any way. i thought about this in relation to my last game. I was (suprise) in the middle of a conflict with another nation tring to complete domination of Asia minor with my fleet and my army of panzers. Eventually I had to abandon or at least postpone my steamroll because of inadequate planning one and also because I ran out of raw materials to continue production at the necessary level to continue my advance. I didn't have the supply to meet my personal demand. This eventually led into a personal train of thought into the question of s &d. Any company, whether it be a product based with tangible items or a service based with time on their recource list, deals with this graph when making decisions. I should have used concepts like this in my game. But anyway, to be successful you need to be able to know exactly where the graph sits so you can set prices according to demand; or just where it will be if you are really good so as to not lose any time.
One other thought my game make me think about was scarcity. What does econ try to solve? Scarcity. If there wqas an unlimited ammount of all resources then no real economy would need exist. No price would be established because there would be enough that people would get all they need. The only problem then is time and even then its a limiting problem and not necessarily a real economical question. Simple but so important. Maybe even in real life I will realize things are scarce and won't overuse or be able to resupply.

My Own Depression...sort of

I hated the game I played most recently. I went in thinking about the great depression readings and how that occured. Because of this the idea came about in my mind to try and recreate the same kind of events in the game. This time I played as the French and made allies with the bordering factions like the English and Germans (for some reason I tend to stay in Europe). I tried to gain an advantage in pure markets internally rather than gold from conquest. My intention was to try to inflate my economy and crash it to see firsthand the experience. What ended up happening was that I ran through my resources too quickly and didn't have sufficient trade to sustain myself. This just reiderated to me how valuable trade is. One cannot live on bread alone. You also need wood, steel, and various other things. If you can't make it all on your own then you need to get some help from those willing to trade with you because they either are charitable (not likely) or see soemthing of value that you have.
I wish you could make your own impossible production possibilities curve. I wish you could make your max on both ends and reach potentioally outside the line. Unfortunately this is not so. I know I ended up not relating to how the events between the world wars in america that led to the darkest economic time in our history but I hit something else. I think now that trade is the most important thing one nation can do to ensure health in money. If you trade with someone, you are basically using two economies for yourself rather than one. And if you cooperate long enough a rapport can develope where generosity and goowill can and likely will enter the situation.
One other aspect I didn't touch on is how this trade is only possible if one takes care of themselves. You need the individuals to work and specialize in whatever they choose to do to allow them to produce as much as possible. It goes from the world to a continent to a nation to its citizens. A house is not a house without walls and a roof and such, but can a house stand without a foundation? There is an obvious answer here. If people stay in line the entire public sector can build up the floor to make a nation economy. Individuals working, making money, and buying and selling creates the free market system that promotes the sofar best possible economy that makes trade an attractive prospect for another nation. They may see this and think ,'hey, maybe their prosperity will rub off on us. I mean at least we can benefit from their wonderful surpluses' or at least something along those lines. But in the ned, it is all one in the same. You need all parts , both those big and small, to succeed. Next time I'm not sure what I'll stumble into but I think it will spark more thought. It always does.

Trade-offs.

i sat in class the other day and listend to the lecture on how absolute advantage and comparative advantage. No big deal. It is basic economics in the macro sector. Just a section in a textbook until now. All I could think about was a game I played about two weeks back when i played a stint as the German empire (I love them). I set most of my cities up near very defensive positions in or near the mountains. My mining and physical good production was good relative to how I had been doing in previous games. I thought that by mining the raw ores that my war machine would be much stronger; and yes it wqould be. But at the same time I had to feed and provide for my people. because of this I had to allocate many resources that could be used for other purposes to agriculture; there fore incurring the opportunity cost of not being able to mine as much. And if I decided to farm a bunch then my cost is crazy because I had by far the most metal production in the world (Germany is into metal today-rock on). I just thought as I sat there listening to the lecture that I should have allied with say France to increase my agriculture without having to give up workers to do this as much. France has a coastline close to the sea; plus for trade. They had rivers down pat and built up there. This is where they excelled. I had the other part covered. Why didn't I give it a shot? I was in the middle of a war with the Russians in the east and the Greeks in mild skirmishes to the southeast. With two real opponents I needed a neutral ally to help me out so I could turn out my prized panzers and other war materials as fast as was realistically possible and constantly push the limits without jeopardizing game. Well, I didn't follow my own advice and France got scared and attacked me. Yeah, I gave up. I didnt even want to know what happened. France didn't do me in but it was the combination. I should have been buddy buddy even though they were weaker. Next time I will remember class and this past experience and try to advance my personal decision-making and abilities so I can play at a higher difficulty level.

What is missing here?

What drives an economy? What makes it work? What makes it strong? One could easily say or see that at the most basic level it is the consumer. Regardless of the leaders they can't force sales that generate revenue when pepoel spend their money on goods. I think Civ should use more of this aspect (wish i knew how to do some serious moding). The last reading made me realize the dirth of microeconomics it has. Now can be arguements made against my statement, but I cannot see for myself the same concepts that are in real life.
In my current game, I played as the Germans again but I tried a much more moderate approach (and a slightly less difficult game setting). I said no to the personal blitzkreig and massive attacks I tried last time that would have led to the collapse of my nation. Not to neglet my power though, I did supply my army well, but became more of a defensive force; known homeland is a much better fighting area for effectiveness. My resources were geared for production and mining rather than natural sources. So I had not the easiet time in the beginning but once I got my society advanced enough my crops were no longer an issue and my own personal industrial revolution led to a great economy. My trading and diploamatic relationships were second to none. Then I started to think about things on the smaller scale; about the citizens and what makes them put money and basically an investment into the stock of my nation if it were possible. But I began to think where is the advertisement? Product placement? Marketing? I know Civ is not meant to focus on that; that is not why it was created. But it did inspire the thought in my mind. I know I will probably go into the business field and will do something like one of these things. I think this helps the economy more than peple realize. Can a country do anything without being internally strong? Forget about being able to expand and begin globilization. I know that if you dont have people exercising their purchasing power as consumers stagnation, decline, and collapse are the only things you can expect to happen. Those individual elements that focus on the individual people make the money world continually spin around. My next game I'm sure I will try something else out and find more things that interest me but this time for certain I got a lot out spending time playing a game.

consequences.

Before you do anything you should consider the outcome. If I fail will I be able to recover? Is the risk worth the reward? This is how you should approach an issue. Also you should plan ahead to avoid any unwanted problems or be more than ready to confront them when they arise. This wisdom I wish I had had when i began my second game of Civ. I hastily rushed into battle and promptly got defeated and was not able to recover; meanwhile the victor took the spoils and flourished. I played as Germany and just as in real life I overestimated my power. I thought that my tanks and planes would eb able to roll over anything that stood in my way. For a while it did. I ruled for about three years until my resources began to fail. I forgot those tanks are run by men. Produced in factories from materials gathered elsewhere and it costs money at almost all points and including upkeep to ensure I had the best up front. Without an option to brign in a national revenue I was done. I never even thought about using the pen to sign agreements or treaties or alliances. I got trigger happy and decided to attack when it was not time. I should have let my economy restabalize before attempting to move on. I was priveledged enough through my southern conquest to have a good sources for trade on the oceans and the best advantage geographically I could have possibly had. Sometimes you can be gifted wiht the best resources but squander them quickly. I think this is one aspect Diamond has not touched on enough. I think personally while geography plays a huge role in developing economies the ultimate factor in the whole picture is the management; the human element. Hopefully nest time I can do much better With my personal decisions and not be too hasty in my execution of my ideas.

Initial Civ.

I thought it was quite interesting how the events played out at the start of the game. I began with no real power; no military and just wanderers under my control. My technology lacked in any advancement at all. I chose the Greeks, who by classical standards, had quite an advanced civilization. I thought that maybe because of their geographic location with water all around that trade and fishing would propel me to victory or at least a state from which I could compete. It was not easy at all. I saw what struggles people must have had to have gone through. I saw farming become the best thing in the world. Someone who could make food grow out of the ground became like a messiah for my poeple. No more did I have to scrounge the land for just bits of meager malnourishment. This saved me for the beginning.
Enter my readings. This is from what I made the connections to real life. No longer was civ a fantasy game, it was a simulation. I saw how in Guns, Germs, and Steel how a crop could make such a difference. If the said crop made it to an area life could flourish. Technology could advance because the people had the energy to accomplish tasks other than just to gather food. Their time was not occupied by just survival; they could afford to branch out. I'm sure if I chose some other group I might have ahd it easier or harder. It was luck that allowed me to have a great place to set up cities or waterways from which to base my agriculture. I am plaeased with how it went for the time I had and am aniticipating an exciting sequal to this experience.