<!-Quote-!>Quote:What would happen if the Social Security Percentage of Low Level Worker Salary and the Yearly Social Security Payments were each 100% ?<!-/Quote-!>
First, I have no idea what weird notion you're getting, but the statement seems off. Anyway, if you set the SS payments to 100% of LLW salary, the country would pay 100% of the average salary of LLW to disabled, retired, and jobless. AFAIK, the total of these payments would be added to the Total Income of All Workers. In other words, once it's paid out it is treated like any other income for the determination of other numbers.
What follows is somewhat speculation since I never bothered to investigate in meticulous detail being that there is little reason, but effectively, I believe this increases the -mean- income per person which would increase the relative "affluence rating" of the country. I'm calling it "affluence rating", but really it's just that higher mean incomes equates to more money entering Investment, Pension, and Housing funds housing and pensions I'm pretty sure are meaningless numbers... housing has always been and pensions have been made a joke. Investment funds formerly carried significant importance in country management being a solid way to develop country revenue, but were completely destroyed in "playability" a couple years ago. Pretty sure private contributions to health and education and income taxes are also affected. I don't mean simply raw proportional growth either as I suspect there is some formula similar to tax bracketing where a larger percentage goes to these as income grows. That's at least what the data has appeared to show in the past. It could be calculated a different way depending on how roundabout they wanted to get, this is just the easiest explanation to what I've seen. And no, I have no reason to believe they didn't go a more complicated route (judging by how battle results are calculated).
Anyway, the numbers for births/deaths have not been anywhere near accurate for a few years since they removed the soft cap on population size. Don't get too attached to those.
The welfare index is something different from social security. The old rules determining it were to take the lowest value (max 130) of Health, Education, Transportation, Social security
Index +10, Employment Index +40, Supply Index +30, and that's all I can remember. The change with the new system is that the Welfare index doesn't appear to be neatly Rawlsian anymore... which is commendable since any mention of Rawls taken seriously creeps out this poster... and is modfied by Game Level, recent Population purchases/sales, and the quality of good purchased for the country. Ofc, as with all indexes in SC, it also takes into account history for the purpose of smoothing the graph (and making the breakdown annoying).
The system does have significant safeguards in place that will supply the market whenever necessary. The system's intervention will be extremely obvious whenever it happens. I've done stress tests on certain markets in the past. Additionally there are price controls that prevent market price from going above or below certain numbers (this will be based on the Base Price of a good). You can tell when the market price graph looks like jagged teeth.
Remember that you're playing a game that has been dissected by extremely competitive people over many years time and time again. The response by the gamemaster has been to close every avenue of gameplay that doesn't meet their very narrow conception of how the game should be played. Lots of fun and interesting features are no longer functional for this reason. Don't worry... there are still at least a few roads that haven't been taken if you're creative and patient. It'll be really boring unless you really got a head for grinding numbers.
ASQ is probably the way to go if you want a GM-approved method of making money and getting really involved in the numbers.