Honestly, there's nothing wrong with it as a topic of discussion, just to burn time, I guess, but in practice, this seems a rather needless bit of information. Just my own opinion, of course. Which is to say, for my own intents and purposes of enjoying a movie/game/book/adventure in the Star Wars setting, I really have no need of such a detail.

 

FWIW, I think if you really delve into any manner of details regarding the logistics of a 'galaxy-spanning government' it all breaks down and becomes pretty darn impractical, if not utterly absurd. That doesn't mean I don't still find the stories and adventures in the Star Wars setting fun.

 

If I had to choose among the systems that I'd guess were 'most likely' to actually be possible though, I would favor something like this:

 

Of course it could be that there are many planetary currencies but that the IGBC maintains convertibility and adjusts rates on the fly so that all transfers APPEAR to be in a universal currency?

I think the concept of a galactic empire is workable as long as you consider it a kind of scaled up Persian empire system and the planetary moffs as kind of satraps.

 

No one section will rebel due to the combined might of the other sections.

 

Obviously it's a very lose empire with only broad policy and military might emanating directly from its head.

 

The republic on the other hand...well...we already know how that ends. Hobson's choice, either too unwieldy or insufficient representation, either way nobody's happy and in the first instance very little gets done.

The republic on the other hand...well...we already know how that ends. Hobson's choice, either too unwieldy or insufficient representation, either way nobody's happy and in the first instance very little gets done.

And yet, somehow, it was the galactic form of government for twenty-five thousand years.

Who backs the Imperial Credit? The Sith threatening the shopkeeper with a lightsaber or force choke/lightning.

These replies fall completely flat because they're missing the point of this question.

 

The Empire pays everyone — such as Bounty Hunters — in "credits". These people are not a Sith Lord, nor does the average person paid by the Empire have a personalized Sith escort roughing up shopkeepers.

 

It's like asking, "Why does standing in direct sunlight make me hot?"

And someone saying, "Because if it made you cold my big brother would go fly up to the Sun and punch it!"

 

Edited May 15, 2013 by SW_display_name

These replies fall completely flat because they're missing the point of this question.

 

The Empire pays everyone — such as Bounty Hunters — in "credits". These people are not a Sith Lord, nor does the average person paid by the Empire have a personalized Sith escort roughing up shopkeepers.

 

It's like asking, "Why does standing in direct sunlight make me hot?"

And someone saying, "Because if it made you cold my big brother would go fly up to the Sun and punch it!"

 

 

And this reply misses the fact that the Empire has a large Army with which to intimidate planets into accepting their currency.

 

Not to mention their intelligence division, which while it existed would be sabotaging/killing anybody who refused to recognise their money. Since their bribes and payments to independant professionals were in Imperial credits, and they would not accept intransigence from anybody.

Edited May 15, 2013 by AlexDougherty

And yet, somehow, it was the galactic form of government for twenty-five thousand years.

 

You'll note my comment was a reply to the plausibility of it, as such your reply makes next to no sense.

And this reply misses the fact that the Empire has a large Army with which to intimidate planets into accepting their currency.

 

Not to mention their intelligence division, which while it existed would be sabotaging/killing anybody who refused to recognise their money. Since their bribes and payments to independant professionals were in Imperial credits, and they would not accept intransigence from anybody.

I'm not an economist myself, but I feel like you really don't understand how these concepts work.

I'm not an economist myself, but I feel like you really don't understand how these concepts work.

 

Actually I do understand how economies work, and under peace time conditions the Imperial Credit would be in serious trouble. But the game economy is under a war footing, which changes the economic rules. Iit's not discussed much but the threat of a huge well armed standing army can and does force smaller countries into accepting a flawed currency. This is not a theory, it has happened, in the last century in fact, it's not efficient economically but it does work.

Edited May 16, 2013 by AlexDougherty

Surely that situation would result in rampant inflation (unless there's widespread wage and price controls) and a massive black market.

 

I can't see it working on a galactic scale, even on a smaller scale unofficial currencies tend to spring up when a currency doesn't have people's confidence.

The Imperial credit is the monetary equivalent of the divine right of kings. It's worth something because the Emperor says it's worth something, and it's worth what the Emperor says it's worth. You use it because the Emperor says you have to use it, and because if you use something else you'll be tortured to death.

That explains what the emperor has been doing secluded for the last few thousand years.

 

Listing every item in the empire and a price for it.

You'll note my comment was a reply to the plausibility of it, as such your reply makes next to no sense.

Okay. If you're trying to talk in terms of abstractions as opposed to how things actually happened in the EU, how is it any easier for authoritarian galactic regimes to satisfy the competing interests and desires of the innumerably vast groups of their supporters than it is for broadly democratic ones? Fundamentally, the problem of unwieldy bureaucracy/poor representation for interests is not a problem for democratic regimes, it is a problem for all of them. An Empire is based as much on the consent and approval of the elites as is a Republic, and as such it is incumbent on such an Empire to maintain policies acceptable to enough of those elites that they continue to support it.

But there are less elites and thus more democracy for them.

 

As I said, moffs must operate somewhat like Persian satraps given the communication difficulties.

 

They are dictators in the emperors name, semi independent really as long as they don't stray too far.

 

Military might enforces order among the hoi-poloi, they never have democracy so never expect things to go their way, a small amount of democracy is in some ways worse than none. Ruthless suppression of dissent is expected and there's no forum for grievance nor much scope for other planets to disapprove, republic however has the problem that it must pander to public opinion more and cannot be so extreme in suppressing a desire to leave, and that desire WILL occur, some planets are always going to be worse off and policys are bound to favour others one time or another.

But there are less elites and thus more democracy for them.

 

As I said, moffs must operate somewhat like Persian satraps given the communication difficulties.

 

They are dictators in the emperors name, semi independent really as long as they don't stray too far.

 

Military might enforces order among the hoi-poloi, they never have democracy so never expect things to go their way, a small amount of democracy is in some ways worse than none. Ruthless suppression of dissent is expected and there's no forum for grievance nor much scope for other planets to disapprove, republic however has the problem that it must pander to public opinion more and cannot be so extreme in suppressing a desire to leave, and that desire WILL occur, some planets are always going to be worse off and policys are bound to favour others one time or another.

I don't necessarily think that authoritarian governments have fewer elites. You mention the hoi polloi and the need to pander to public opinion in democracies, with that same need supposedly obviated in authoritarian societies due to a lack of expectation of personal influence on the state on the part of the average citizen/subject. But is that more of a function of ideology or of circumstantial legitimacy, or of alternative factors? How much do the interests of the average citizen or subject actually impact any given democracy compared to those of regional or class elites? And if that's the case, then, we're right back to where we started, with the Republic having to manage essentially the same amount of different - not necessarily divergent - interests as a potential galactic Empire.

 

Furthermore, your repeated allusions to Achaemenid satraps aren't really commentaries on authoritarianism/democracy, but on centralization/decentralization. The shahanshahs ran an empire that was fairly decentralized on the periphery. How are quasi-independent Imperial moffs - for which, incidentally, we don't have a whole lot of in-game evidence - any different from the amount of local autonomy the Republic gives to its sector assemblies and governments?

The Imperial credit is the monetary equivalent of the divine right of kings. It's worth something because the Emperor says it's worth something, and it's worth what the Emperor says it's worth. You use it because the Emperor says you have to use it, and because if you use something else you'll be tortured to death.

Again, I'm stupid / not an economist so maybe I'm not getting this. But...

 

Your Bounty Hunter kills some random person and gets paid in Imperial Credits. Why would a shopkeeper on Coruscant care that the Emperor "declares" this is "worth something, or else!"

 

That's what I don't understand. Why is Imperial credit considered "good" in non-Imperial parts of the galaxy, if its only value is because someone orders you to believe it's valuable? Especially places like the Republic, with more than enough power to oppose such declarations.

 

It seems like getting paid 10,000 rubles in the Soviet Union, then trying to buy a car in the USA.

Edited May 16, 2013 by SW_display_name

I don't necessarily think that authoritarian governments have fewer elites.

sorry, should have been clearer, probably more elites but they are the ones that need to feel their opinions are valued and are engaged with government because they are the ones that can influence secession.

You mention the hoi polloi and the need to pander to public opinion in democracies, with that same need supposedly obviated in authoritarian societies due to a lack of expectation of personal influence on the state on the part of the average citizen/subject. But is that more of a function of ideology or of circumstantial legitimacy, or of alternative factors? How much do the interests of the average citizen or subject actually impact any given democracy compared to those of regional or class elites? And if that's the case, then, we're right back to where we started, with the Republic having to manage essentially the same amount of different - not necessarily divergent - interests as a potential galactic Empire.

but it's not about how much diverging interest they have to manage, its about HOW they manage it. A democracy has to do it with engagement and convincing it's citizens its in their best interest, an empire can do it in a large part with military might, especially where it can move troops away from their homelands.

Furthermore, your repeated allusions to Achaemenid satraps aren't really commentaries on authoritarianism/democracy, but on centralization/decentralization. The shahanshahs ran an empire that was fairly decentralized on the periphery.

Exactly, Decentralization (which is not so present in what we've seen of the republic, they all float of to coruscant to have chats about everything) My allusions are precisely because they have the same problems on different scales, large communication times.

How are quasi-independent Imperial moffs - for which, incidentally, we don't have a whole lot of in-game evidence - any different from the amount of local autonomy the Republic gives to its sector assemblies and governments?

I'd say there IS a fair amount of evidence for considerable autonomy on the part of the moffs/planetary governors both in the game, in the films and a LOT in the extended universe.

It's different because of the methods of control as I keep saying. Sector assemblies who are doing badly would actually have an interest in blaming the problems on republic centralization, passing off blame. Ones that are doing well would try to take credit. This would, if anything increase calls for separation at least in the bad times. Empire doesn't have that worry because those sort of calls are met with lasers going in the opposite direction and there's not the forum for mass disgust and disapproval, or at least not in a viable form.

 

If you crush a rebellion in empire you create fear that the same will happen to others. If you do the same in a republic you get lambasted by other planetary representatives worried the same might happen to them.

 

 

Of course, it's all speculation that's why I try to bring it back to things we know about and relate them. It's a discussion where I can never be right or at least we'll never know.

Edited May 16, 2013 by Trimaxion

Another thing i'd wonder:

what impact on the economy of the Empire slavery had?

Another thing i'd wonder:

what impact on the economy of the Empire slavery had?

 

I wonder if they were able to export things to the Republic cheaper then the Republic.

 

Like made in china rather then made in us price difference.

Again, I'm stupid / not an economist so maybe I'm not getting this. But...

 

Your Bounty Hunter kills some random person and gets paid in Imperial Credits. Why would a shopkeeper on Coruscant care that the Emperor "declares" this is "worth something, or else!"

 

That's what I don't understand. Why is Imperial credit considered "good" in non-Imperial parts of the galaxy, if its only value is because someone orders you to believe it's valuable? Especially places like the Republic, with more than enough power to oppose such declarations.

 

It seems like getting paid 10,000 rubles in the Soviet Union, then trying to buy a car in the USA.

 

Your shopkeeper on Coruscant wouldn't accept the Imperial Credit, in fact she would report the person trying to pay with Imperial Credits to the Coruscant Security Force and the SIS. The Republic Credit and the Imperial credit are completely different currencies, and generally mutually exclusive.

 

They would only be used together on Fringe systems and Independents like the Hutt Cartel. Fringe systems would use it because they can't afford to pass any possible currencies, they need all the trade they can get. Most Independent systems would use it because they don't want to be hassled by the Imperial Army/Fleet. Out of the Independents only the Hutts have enough of a powerbase to deny the Imperials, and they are playing some sort of game to see which side they should support if any.

Surely that situation would result in rampant inflation (unless there's widespread wage and price controls) and a massive black market.

 

I can't see it working on a galactic scale, even on a smaller scale unofficial currencies tend to spring up when a currency doesn't have people's confidence.

 

The Empire has total price control in place, people can only sell with Imperial permission for what the Imperial Bureau says. On the fringe systems, hundreds of unofficial currencies will have popped up, as well as barter economy. Part of the job of the troopers is to enforce the Imperial Credit and stamp out the other monies, which increases the local disaffection.

Your shopkeeper on Coruscant wouldn't accept the Imperial Credit, in fact she would report the person trying to pay with Imperial Credits to the Coruscant Security Force and the SIS. The Republic Credit and the Imperial credit are completely different currencies, and generally mutually exclusive.

Then why does anyone who operates in both spaces accept Imperial credit as payment?

 

My understanding is that (logically speaking), using Republic credit in Imperial space would generally fly, by the reasoning that the Republic currency is obviously "good" and you can rely on third-parties to accept / convert it.

 

I guess the problem is that if you're dealing with an "ancient" situation where you have small, upstart Country A fighting against giant, economically-stable Country B, then Country A — while weaker financially due to size/political position — can still mint currency which has a literal value.

 

In this setting, there is no physical currency, it's all just digital signatures and a number in your "credit account". Maybe it's a disconnect of: what exactly is happening when some Moff "transfers credits to your account" for a bounty collection?

 

IRL, that sort of transaction would need an exchange rate going on. Even if you see $US appear in your account, if it started as Yen, it had to be converted somehow.

 

So I guess I have questions like...

• Is there even a concept of "exchange rates" between "credits" ?
  
• If yes, is there an exchange rate between Republic and Imperial credit?
  
• If no, how does the value of a single "credit" stay stable between different galactic "nations" ?
  
• And for people with no allegiance to either side — neutral parties like the Hutts — they still seem to deal in, "credits". Is this some kind of "third credit" ?
  

 

I guess the more I think about this, the more confused I get by what exactly the "credit" system even represents.

Then why does anyone who operates in both spaces accept Imperial credit as payment?

 

My understanding is that (logically speaking), using Republic credit in Imperial space would generally fly, by the reasoning that the Republic currency is obviously "good" and you can rely on third-parties to accept / convert it.

 

I guess the problem is that if you're dealing with an "ancient" situation where you have small, upstart Country A fighting against giant, economically-stable Country B, then Country A — while weaker financially due to size/political position — can still mint currency which has a literal value.

 

In this setting, there is no physical currency, it's all just digital signatures and a number in your "credit account". Maybe it's a disconnect of: what exactly is happening when some Moff "transfers credits to your account" for a bounty collection?

 

IRL, that sort of transaction would need an exchange rate going on. Even if you see $US appear in your account, if it started as Yen, it had to be converted somehow.

 

So I guess I have questions like...

• Is there even a concept of "exchange rates" between "credits" ?
  
• If yes, is there an exchange rate between Republic and Imperial credit?
  
• If no, how does the value of a single "credit" stay stable between different galactic "nations" ?
  
• And for people with no allegiance to either side — neutral parties like the Hutts — they still seem to deal in, "credits". Is this some kind of "third credit" ?
  

 

I guess the more I think about this, the more confused I get by what exactly the "credit" system even represents.

 

In the books the two credits are not connected, but in the game they are treated as the same, but this is a shortcut by EA because they want to keep it simple. This has to be emphasised.

 

In the books and the theoretical universe there would be a concept of exchanging Republic Credits for Imperial Credits, but it would be via a third party like the Hutts. The exchange rate would depend on who exchanged them for you, the Hutts themselves would probably be a bad Idea (extra fees at last minute), but Nar Shadaa would probably have the best exchange rate. If the exchange rate was formalised, which obviously it won't be, then I would expect the Republic Credit to be worth somewhere about 1.5 to 1.8 Imperial Credits, due to the Republic's superior economy.

 

The Hutts might have their own Credits, but I seem to remember from a book in the eighties that they have a completely different monetary unit, and the game is just simplifying things again.

 

It should also be pointed out that the relative value between the two is not fixed and would vary wildly, my figure of

1 RC = 1.5-1.8 IC is an average, as each side wins or looses planets the value of each side would go up and down, and propoganda would affect the value too if the general public believed it.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited May 18, 2013 by AlexDougherty