Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

About welfare and the unemployment rate in SL?

Shadow Garden
Just horsin' around
Join date: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 226
10-03-2005 14:56
From: Issarlk Chatnoir

Unemployment is a problem IRL, in a virtual world it's not. The unemployed avatar doesn't risk seeing his health decaying ; he doesn't even risk becoming an outcast (clothes don't turn into rags, no unwiling hobo on SL...).

There is already a service industry, no need to create one ; content creators get hired by people for custom works.

Those who are _serious_ about earning L$ try to learn something that will allow them to create content. Those who think they are helplessly clumsy or can't learn a thing go to the job forum to work in a club or something.



I suspect that most people who want to do well in Second Life are those with ambitions. They want to learn how to use the building tools, or how to host dance parties, etc. And there are so many things to learn and become good at, that those people should be able to find something that they enjoy doing. Unemployment shouldn't be an issue for those interested in finding a way to express themselves creatively in game.
_____________________
"Ah, ignorance and stupidity all in the same package ... How efficient of you!" - Londo Molari, Babylon V.
Pleasure Semple
Registered User
Join date: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 84
10-03-2005 17:48
From: Schwanson Schlegel
***sigh***
Are we going to start this again?


From: Jillian Callahan
Thanks to Jeska, appearantly not! :D


Reported.
CrystalShard Foo
1+1=10
Join date: 6 Feb 2004
Posts: 682
10-03-2005 22:27
From: Pleasure Semple
Reported.

Reported.
Leena Khan
Lasting Impressionist
Join date: 21 Apr 2004
Posts: 200
10-03-2005 22:28
Reported.

From: CrystalShard Foo
rted.
_____________________
SL was down, and all I got was this stupid signature...
CrystalShard Foo
1+1=10
Join date: 6 Feb 2004
Posts: 682
10-03-2005 22:30
From: Leena Khan
Repo


Reported.
Pleasure Semple
Registered User
Join date: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 84
10-04-2005 08:36
From: CrystalShard Foo
Reported.

From: Leena Khan
Reported.

From: CrystalShard Foo
Reported.

Reported.
Dnate Mars
Lost
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1,309
10-04-2005 09:23
It seem that this thread will be closed soon, because people are going way off topic here.

SL is a "game" (I know it is not a game, blah, blah, blah) to most people. That I think is part of the root of the disagreements. If SL was not a game, as defined by all, would we even be having this debate? If you view it as a game, they everything SHOULD be handed to you, in the most basic sense. If SL is really just a platform, and an extrention of life in general, then nothing should be expected or given to anyone. Part of the problem, as I see it, is that SL, in its current state, is neither a game nor a full platform. It is a hybrid of some sort. This is what is always so confusing when I am trying to explain SL to others.

If I have repeated anything, then I am sorry, I kinda got lost in all the reports... though I must say I do find it most entertaining ;)
_____________________
Visit my website: www.dnatemars.com
From: Cristiano Midnight
This forum is weird.
Traxx Hathor
Architect
Join date: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 422
10-04-2005 11:23
From: Dnate Mars

SL is a "game" (I know it is not a game, blah, blah, blah) to most people. That I think is part of the root of the disagreements. If SL was not a game, as defined by all, would we even be having this debate? If you view it as a game, they everything SHOULD be handed to you, in the most basic sense. If SL is really just a platform, and an extrention of life in general, then nothing should be expected or given to anyone.



We can always decouple SL from what people do in it. For example, SL is a platform, and I use it to play the architecture game.

Some residents like chatting; I like the architect/client relationship because it's a form of collaboration on ideas being implemented. And it's intense! The stakeholders in a sim reconstruction project really care about the reconstruction process and about the quality of the results measured in their own terms. For example the architect's notion of quality may clash with that of stakeholder who wants large signage. Clients may know what they like, but be unaware of the balancing of tradeoffs to accomodate function in a build with both presence and grace.

So that's a fun game, but I don't see game versus platform disagreements as a root cause of the verbal battles in this thread and the others just like it. Many of us use these threads to promote our own opinions on how LL should manage the economy. They can't please everyone, and we all know it. Personally I support inflation reduction to stabilize the currency, and development effort focused on obtaining a stable, high-performance platform.
Dnate Mars
Lost
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1,309
10-04-2005 12:06
From: Traxx Hathor
We can always decouple SL from what people do in it. For example, SL is a platform, and I use it to play the architecture game.

Some residents like chatting; I like the architect/client relationship because it's a form of collaboration on ideas being implemented. And it's intense! The stakeholders in a sim reconstruction project really care about the reconstruction process and about the quality of the results measured in their own terms. For example the architect's notion of quality may clash with that of stakeholder who wants large signage. Clients may know what they like, but be unaware of the balancing of tradeoffs to accomodate function in a build with both presence and grace.

So that's a fun game, but I don't see game versus platform disagreements as a root cause of the verbal battles in this thread and the others just like it. Many of us use these threads to promote our own opinions on how LL should manage the economy. They can't please everyone, and we all know it. Personally I support inflation reduction to stabilize the currency, and development effort focused on obtaining a stable, high-performance platform.


Good idea, but how do I explain that to my non teckie friends? It is a platform with a game in it?
_____________________
Visit my website: www.dnatemars.com
From: Cristiano Midnight
This forum is weird.
CrystalShard Foo
1+1=10
Join date: 6 Feb 2004
Posts: 682
10-04-2005 13:45
Dear Forum:
I hereby apologize for the delay in handing down justice, but even just, honest vigilants of morality must sleep every once in awhile. But fear not, my friends, as justice will strike those who deserve it, even if at times it may take a while.

In any case:

From: Pleasure Semple

Reported.

Reported.
splat1 Edison
Registerd Nut
Join date: 6 Sep 2004
Posts: 353
10-04-2005 13:52
Reading this has been odd and left me with questions for the lindens.


But in any case.

your all reported! :eek:
_____________________
Splat Soft - We exsist in the RL to!
Gigas Bunny (Mule)
####
You see, our experts describe you as an appallingly dull fellow, unimaginative, timid, lacking in initiative, spineless, easily dominated, no sense of humour, tedious company and irrepressibly drab and awful. And whereas in most professions these would be considerable drawbacks, in chartered accountancy they are a positive boon.
CrystalShard Foo
1+1=10
Join date: 6 Feb 2004
Posts: 682
10-04-2005 13:53
From: Dnate Mars
Good idea, but how do I explain that to my non teckie friends? It is a platform with a game in it?


I'd say that this is a "virtual world". It may sound less appealing then a game, but its true.

Its an online place where you can go and build and create anything you want - and it happens to have a game theme to it.

Frankly though... I used to be one of the biggest advocates of "Its not a game", but with the whole economy going on and seeing how people use the place more and more as a gambling/casino spot, caring more about looks and money then creativity... i'd say its quickly becoming a game, and nothing more.

About the original topic of this thread, I dont think welfare is necessary, and I dont think unemployment is what it appears.

SecondLife is not real life. You do not have to "work or die". You can do very well without working and without money in SecondLife - all you need are minimal skills to create anything.

Working and having money is just the alternative, which allow you to buy other people's efforts.

The real problem here is the popular misconception of "if i'm broke, I cant do anything!". Which is simply false. You'll just not be able to BUY other people's efforts: But nothing is preventing you from sitting down and doing anything yourself, or combining efforts with friends and doing something kickass.

To conclude, I think that if any welfare is necessary in SecondLife, its a touch of education on what you can do while you're "broke" and why its not the end of the world.

Maybe we need "Pennyless 101" mentor events in SL?
Gwyneth Llewelyn
Winking Loudmouth
Join date: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1,336
10-04-2005 15:33
From: CrystalShard Foo
Maybe we need "Pennyless 101" mentor events in SL?


I do run a few of those, although they go by the PC name of "SL Jobs" :)

Anyway, on the removal of stipends, it's going to be inevitable as SL grows. If you take the trouble to search for a year-old TH by Philip, you'll see he claimed that "adjustments to the stipends" would be necessary (not a removal, but a downwards adjustment). The reason is quite simple: inflation. Every day, 500 new users join SL. That's 3500 new users per week; even if all are Basic accounts, that's a staggering additional L$ 175,000 "minted" from thin year every week. Or, for the overall picture — 60,000 users, 84% of which are on Basic, get L$ 7 million from thin air every week. Mind you, these figures are just for the base stipend, ie. I'm antecipating the rule that will reduce bonus stipends from ratings to zero.

Clearly, something has to be done, and Philip correctly foresaw this. The easiest solution, of course, is simply to remove stipends.

Of course, we could argue if creating more money sinks wouldn't solve the problem. So far, however, all previous "experiments" with artificial money sinks — paying for prims to be rezzed, paying for teleports, etc. — have failed utterly. The only "reasonable" money sink right now seems to be uploading things (remember, ratings will probably be meaningless as money sinks pretty soon).

In the mean time, the problem remains. If you don't want/can't enter the "creator's paradise", don't want to work as a dancer, and definitely don't want to exchange US$ for L$, what should you do?

Perhaps something like this (sorry, shameless plug) or like this (pretty similar to Cheyenne Marquez' original idea).

Again, residents to the rescue. Really, I didn't expect nothing less :)
_____________________

Hayden Hedges
Registered User
Join date: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 138
10-05-2005 08:54
I haven't read the whole thread (Yes, I really am that lazy) but it seems that some people are missing what I consider to be an obvious point where stipend entitlement comes in.

You pay your real life money to gain entrance to this world we call SL. Why is it the responsibility of LL, or anyone else for that matter, to pay you L$X amount a week so you can buy a shirt? If you are determined to follow a consumer lifestyle in SL then the responsibility to finance that lifestyle should fall on your shoulders. You don't starve in SL, you don't require shelter form the elements. Simply put, if you want to spend you should go earn.
Musicteacher Rampal
Registered User
Join date: 20 Feb 2004
Posts: 824
10-05-2005 19:16
From: Hayden Hedges
I haven't read the whole thread (Yes, I really am that lazy) but it seems that some people are missing what I consider to be an obvious point where stipend entitlement comes in.

You pay your real life money to gain entrance to this world we call SL. Why is it the responsibility of LL, or anyone else for that matter, to pay you L$X amount a week so you can buy a shirt? If you are determined to follow a consumer lifestyle in SL then the responsibility to finance that lifestyle should fall on your shoulders. You don't starve in SL, you don't require shelter form the elements. Simply put, if you want to spend you should go earn.



This isn't directed towards you Hayden, just using it as an example of the feelings of many people in this thread.

From the point of view of someone who is in SL for the economy, business aspect, and to be compensated for their creations this totally makes sense.

People who joined Second Life purely for fun and socialization probably can't understand why people expect them to get a second job and some even find comments like this as offensive.

Honestly I can understand both aspects, I've come to understand the importance of people getting paid for their time in SL, however even those of us who do not create, sell, escort, dance, advise, deal land, custom build, run events, we also spend time in SL. Is our time in SL worth nothing if we don't "work" during it? Do we not also deserve compensation for our time? If not and all the "consumers" stopped spending time in SL because we're not compensated then who's going to buy all the stuff everyone works so hard to build? SL needs both types of players, and both need incentive to stay. Telling one type to get a job is not exactly incentive since most of them are here to escape RL.

I guess the whole reason LL even started stipends was to offer incentive for people to spend time in-game. Now, the high stipends and bonuses have brought people to a certain standard of second-living...I think it's completely reasonable for them to be upset as that standard goes down with cuts. Do I see the cuts as necessary? Yes if they are unfair bonuses, like the rating bonuses. It seems every time LL does something nice for us a few people exploit it and, it becomes unfair, and then it is taken away or changed. The member referral changes are proof of that exploitation, the 45 day requirement for the Linden exchange is another example of trying to stop fraud before it starts.

I cannot understand someone placing there real life standard of living in a computer community that could disappear any day. It's incredible and awesome that some are able to make that kind of money through SL, but for me it's just WAY too risky. I understand why people get so heated in debates like this when a large part of their RL income is at stake.

I guess for now the argument of stipends is moot because for now LL says they're staying. It would be nice if the business class could think of them as incentive to spend time in-game rather than welfare though. Put yourself in LL's position....they have to be sooo incredibly torn. Take measures to stabilize the $L value and tick off the "consumer" class? or do nothing for now and continue to tick off the "business" class. I'm very glad I'm not an employee!

I guess my whole point is that the "business" class keeps trying to get everyone else to "see their point of view" But can they see the point of view of non business people in game? Can they see the stipends as incentive rather than welfare? Or should those not wanting to "earn a second living" go elsewhere?

Should the content creators continue to make the same quality stuff for less take home $$?

Should people in SL for pure fun concern themselves with the state of the economy?

Should those who make things be concerned with others having fun?

Should every individual in SL be out for themselves or should it be a better world than the one we really live in??

I don't know the answers to any of them....I guess they're just rhetorical. I'm trying my best to see both sides and to try to be compassionate to both sides. On the other hand...if everyone in SL was "employed" and earned all the $L they needed through second-jobs nobody would buy any $L...hmmm.....
Schwanson Schlegel
SL's Tokin' Villain
Join date: 15 Nov 2003
Posts: 2,721
10-05-2005 21:42
From: musicteacher Rampal
People who joined Second Life purely for fun and socialization probably can't understand why people expect them to get a second job and some even find comments like this as offensive.

"You get what you pay for" comes to mind. The only expectation is for people to pay for what they get. If you earn the $L through ingame activities or purchase them is irelevant, the point is that the $L must have value.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Honestly I can understand both aspects, I've come to understand the importance of people getting paid for their time in SL, however even those of us who do not create, sell, escort, dance, advise, deal land, custom build, run events, we also spend time in SL. Is our time in SL worth nothing if we don't "work" during it?

Your time is not worth nothing, to you and those that enjoy your social interaction. The self worth of a user's time is to be determined by that user. Economically, your time is worthless if nobody is willing to pay for that time.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Do we not also deserve compensation for our time?

Monetary compensation from the platform providing the environment in which you spend your time? No way.

From: musicteacher Rampal
If not and all the "consumers" stopped spending time in SL because we're not compensated then who's going to buy all the stuff everyone works so hard to build?

If people are not willing to spend RL money for the virtual goods in this world, then we might as well shut this puppy down. That is a basic principle that this world is founded on. If LL must subsidize the purchase of RL goods via stipends/bonuses, then this world is destined for failure.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Telling one type to get a job is not exactly incentive since most of them are here to escape RL.

I beleive LL is trying to encourage the purchase of $L. They are fanning the flames of creation with dollar bills. They desperately want to accelerate the development of better content.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Now, the high stipends and bonuses have brought people to a certain standard of second-living...I think it's completely reasonable for them to be upset as that standard goes down with cuts.

I agree. It is not unreasonable to fight for something that has regularly been given to you. At the same time, I believe everyone must take a look objectively at the situation and come to the realization of what SL is. SL is based upon the principle of users creating the content, and getting compensated when they make compelling content that users are willing to purchase.

From: musicteacher Rampal
I cannot understand someone placing there real life standard of living in a computer community that could disappear any day. It's incredible and awesome that some are able to make that kind of money through SL, but for me it's just WAY too risky. I understand why people get so heated in debates like this when a large part of their RL income is at stake.

It is speculation. The same could be said about working for any RL corporation. I agree this seems like a riskier venture, but also believe the payoff may be worth it for the early pioneers. Plus, can you imagine actually making enough money from 'playing' SL? Pretty cool stuff.

From: musicteacher Rampal
It would be nice if the business class could think of them as incentive to spend time in-game rather than welfare though

If the $L they are spending were aquired by not contributing to the economy, then the $L they are spending are essentially devaluing the $L.

From: musicteacher Rampal
I guess my whole point is that the "business" class keeps trying to get everyone else to "see their point of view" But can they see the point of view of non business people in game? Can they see the stipends as incentive rather than welfare? Or should those not wanting to "earn a second living" go elsewhere?

It is the premise behind SL. Stipends for premium accounts devalue the $L. There has been some discussion of that lately, and I believe it to be true. BUT that is incentive for basic members to become premium members, which of course provides revenue for LL. Without LL we don't have a platform, so creators must see that as a cost of doing business in ths world.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Should the content creators continue to make the same quality stuff for less take home $$?

If they continue to make the same quality stuff, they will take home less $$. The idea here is that the quality of 'stuff' will improve as the financial incentive improves. This in turn will draw more users to buy the stuff, the increase in users will provide financial incentive for better content which will draw even more users.....

From: musicteacher Rampal
Should people in SL for pure fun concern themselves with the state of the economy?

Not at all. If they want no part of the economy they should not partake. Keep in mind, purchasing content is partaking in the economy.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Should those who make things be concerned with others having fun?

At the very least, I believe it is every user's responsibility to not infringe on the right of other user's fun.

From: musicteacher Rampal
Should every individual in SL be out for themselves or should it be a better world than the one we really live in??

Just like in RL, I think that both are a valid concern.

From: musicteacher Rampal
I don't know the answers to any of them....I guess they're just rhetorical. I'm trying my best to see both sides and to try to be compassionate to both sides. On the other hand...if everyone in SL was "employed" and earned all the $L they needed through second-jobs nobody would buy any $L...hmmm.....


I did not intend to nitpick your post, it was just 'chock full of' what I think were valid questions. I am glad to see that you are willing to view the subject objectively. That in itself restored my belief that these forums can be a valid venue for open discussion between users of SL.

Plus, it is great to be able to post something other than "reported".
:)
_____________________
Hayden Hedges
Registered User
Join date: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 138
10-06-2005 02:47
Musicteacher, my post was actually more in line with a question I've asked myself since I started in SL. Why do people feel you need money to enjoy this game? I don't see it as a requirement at all. I think new monthly accounts could be given a set amount when they start and after that it should be the responsibility of the individual to decide how they spend their time in SL. If you want a pure fantasy lifestyle then you shouldn't need to worry about money. If you are still wanting things the amount of free products out there is pretty staggering anyway.

Maybe I am a grumpy old man. But I believe that if you 'want' something then you should provide for it yourself, buy the Lindens if you don't want to work. There is precious little anyone actually 'needs' in SL hence my belief that stipends are a pointless waste of resources.
Musicteacher Rampal
Registered User
Join date: 20 Feb 2004
Posts: 824
10-06-2005 10:58
Thank you Schwanson...you make a lot of valid points and those are reasonable answers to questions. I also want to thank you for doing so in a manner that was not inflamitory, attacking, degrading, insulting, or any of the other so commonly seen ways to respond here.

Hayden, like I said...I wasn't responding directly to you, but rather using your point that has been echoed so many times. You also, politely, make a good point. I took a look through the Help Wanted forum and found nothing that I could or would be willing/allowed by my hubby to do with the amount of time I have...though for now finding work is not an issue for me. I'll worry about what to do if stipends go bye bye then. :) *goes off to go improve building skills* :)


I'm so happy to see civilized discussion going on here :)
Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
10-06-2005 14:03
Stipends should stay, precisely because we have so few means of earning Lindens in the game.

The best way to earn them is by building or scripting, right? Or dealing in land. Well, that's only three major ways.

But you have a LOT of people who don't want to do any of that, but still want to enjoy SL and buy things in it.

If the only way they have of doing that is to buy Lindens from the builders and scripters then turn around and give them the Lindens back for their products, that's not going to fly psychologically.

Better to give everybody a small amount (and a larger amount, to justify getting a Premium account and paying the monthly fee), then they'll figure it's just their problem for not budgeting well enough and wanting too much stuff, and if they want more, they'll gradually rationalizing buying the Lindens.

But if they come in and say, "How do I make money here?" and we say, "Learn to build and script," and they say, "I don't want to learn to build and script, I just want to have a house and buy clothes and have fun," and we say, "Then you buy the Lindens from us first," they are going to say, "OK, I see how it is, and I'm out of here."

Pretty soon the only people left will be the builders and scripters, and we'll have nobody left to sell our things to but each other.

It's not like they can take waitress or secretarial or janitorial jobs to make the money, or even charge for drinks at a club.

coco
_____________________
VALENTINE BOUTIQUE
at Coco's Cottages

http://slurl.com/secondlife/Rosieri/85/166/87
Jake Reitveld
Emperor of Second Life
Join date: 9 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,690
10-06-2005 14:50
From: Hayden Hedges
Musicteacher, my post was actually more in line with a question I've asked myself since I started in SL. Why do people feel you need money to enjoy this game? I don't see it as a requirement at all. I think new monthly accounts could be given a set amount when they start and after that it should be the responsibility of the individual to decide how they spend their time in SL. If you want a pure fantasy lifestyle then you shouldn't need to worry about money. If you are still wanting things the amount of free products out there is pretty staggering anyway.

Maybe I am a grumpy old man. But I believe that if you 'want' something then you should provide for it yourself, buy the Lindens if you don't want to work. There is precious little anyone actually 'needs' in SL hence my belief that stipends are a pointless waste of resources.

I suppoose we should have income tax to, and union dues and mafia kickbacks. Insurance premiums land taxes. the works.

SL is not RL. SL is entertainment. People are paying for the service o0f being entertained, and therefore they are entitled to have resources that allow them to availthemselves of things in SL. Especially since there is a major push towarding making residents pay for in world activities. One gets a job in RL to support themselves and to be able to avail them selves of games like SL. It is wrong to assert that people who work hard during the week should be forced to get a second job just to particpate.

Fromn a business standpoint, SL is comepeting for consumers, and more particularly for the entertainment dollars of those consumers. If SL is too much like a job, then we will lose those people. SL is growing rpaidly but I wonder what protion of new users stay, once the encounter the "the a job or go away mentality."
_____________________
ALCHEMY -clothes for men.

Lebeda 208,209
Hayden Hedges
Registered User
Join date: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 138
10-06-2005 15:21
From: Jake Reitveld
I suppoose we should have income tax to, and union dues and mafia kickbacks. Insurance premiums land taxes. the works.

SL is not RL. SL is entertainment. People are paying for the service o0f being entertained, and therefore they are entitled to have resources that allow them to availthemselves of things in SL. Especially since there is a major push towarding making residents pay for in world activities. One gets a job in RL to support themselves and to be able to avail them selves of games like SL. It is wrong to assert that people who work hard during the week should be forced to get a second job just to particpate.

Fromn a business standpoint, SL is comepeting for consumers, and more particularly for the entertainment dollars of those consumers. If SL is too much like a job, then we will lose those people. SL is growing rpaidly but I wonder what protion of new users stay, once the encounter the "the a job or go away mentality."



Sorry, I wasn't clear enough i think. I don't believe SL should be made more like RL. But if you HAVE to buy things to make your fantasy as you want it to be you should provide the funds. Buy lindens if you have to. All you are paying for is access to the world. The world can be enjoyed without money. At least, that is my opinion. I'm not here demanding your stipends are removed. I don't care too strongly either way. But your 'right to be entertained' shouldn't be tied to money. If your definition of being entertained is buying goods you should provide your own funds. Again, in my opinion. This is not a cry for a policy change on my part.
Milkbone Albion
Registered User
Join date: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 22
give me a break already
10-06-2005 18:00
I also did not read the entire thread because my time is just too valuable to read a 16 page thread... but I do have an opinion.

I'm facinated by the SL economy, so this is the forum thread that I usually check out first, but it seems like every week there's a new thread on "we need more money sinks" and "put an end to stipends". We've been over this again and again. SL is not RL. And therefore you can't think totally in RL paradigms when trying to figure out SL.

For example, RL gas prices are through the roof. In SL you don't need a car, but you can buy one if you want (because we can fly). The kinds of discussions that I see time and time again here don't consider how SL is different than RL. It would be like saying that "we should have to buy SL GAS from the Lindens in order to fly, OR we have to buy a car and SL gas to get around.. and that would be a new money sink." And as stupid as that idea is, someone out there will say, "that's not a bad idea."

That's because they're not considering that LL is a business that needs to make a profit, and in reality, if they push users away, they make no money. Plain and simple. The reason I'm here is because things are the way they are. So if all the sudden I had to pay taxes, or they take away my stipen, or they start charging me to fly, I'll quit and take my land teir and monthy service fee with me.

The truth is that I already have a Real Life, this is my Second Life. AND I'm paying a hell of a lot in US$ to have this seconds life.. a lot more than I spend on any other "game". So I don't consider it that I'm being "given" a stipened, but that I'm paying for the $L. Now, I guess you could do away with premium accounts and make me buy the first 512 of land tier and make me buy L on the LindeX. But LL will have to look at their bottom line and weigh it against how many users they would lose.

BACK ON TOPIC.. there is walfare and their are jobs in SL. The welfare is the $50L per week for basic users, and the jobs are very obvious. You want a house, you build it. That's a job. Money is relative when you can make whatever you're talented enough to make. It's not like we need gas, food, lodging... cause we dont. There are no SL babies starving on the streets or sims that are flooded due to weather, or Avitars being murdered for their beliefs. So get over it everyone. We don't want SL to be too much like RL.

I think that if you really look at who it is that complains about money sinks and stipends, it's the people who've been around a while and don't need the allowance, and who have lots of $L to sell. But those newer users who are living tuesday to tuesday, which is the MAJORITY of the users, don't want to get rid of stipend, and don't want to have to pay $L to fly or teleport or create or chat or log on.

Look at the lindex transaction report. It's those with the $L 100,000+ in their accounts that are worried about the exchange rate. But the value of the $L will always be based on supply and demand, and any time that someone wants to dump 100,000L the value will go down.
Kris Ritter
paradoxical embolism
Join date: 31 Oct 2003
Posts: 6,627
10-07-2005 00:48
From: Cocoanut Koala
Stipends should stay, precisely because we have so few means of earning Lindens in the game


"Stipends should stay because I lack imagination" :rolleyes:
Gwyneth Llewelyn
Winking Loudmouth
Join date: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1,336
10-07-2005 03:06
Milkbone, while in SL you're perfectly entitled to do whatever you wish, and consider it to be whatever you want — and, after all, I think that's the point of SL — there are some actions/decisions by LL that have influence on how SL's economy works.

Simply put, if you increase artificially the amount of money in SL, you get inflation.

So, your weekly stipends are worth less, since everybody will start raising their prices. At the end of the day, you get the reverse effect that you intended (more money available for each user).

No matter how much you wish to separate SL's economy from RL's economy, SL is a pretty reasonable simulation, and it's very easy to see inflation at work after just a few months of "not enough money sinks".

That has hardly anything to do with people wishing to buy or sell L$. Actually, the reason LL is worried about the economy so much, is that they want that stipends have some buying power. If a simple pair of shorts costs L$ 5,000 due to inflation, how will a new user be able to afford it? If you raise the weekly stipend to L$ 5,000, next day the shorts will be on sale for L$ 50,000, and so on. Controlling inflation and unemployment are contradictory things in RL economy, and incredibly tricky to manage properly.

The only alternative to inflation would be "LL setting fixed prices" (ie. "all shorts are to eb offered for L$ 50, or else";). That way you can increase the money supply without fearing inflation. You may very well imagine the creators' reaction to that. The more clever ones would simply forfeit payment in L$ and use third-party sites to sell their content for US$, or something like that (there are several different ways to circumvent "fixed pricing";).

So, as much as I think you have your right and entitlement on your opinion ("increase welfare!";), SL's economy is already too complex to make such a simple decision.

Also notice that it's a very, very small number of people that would leave SL in case the stipends disappeared (or were reduced). You'd probably see the remaining ones striving to look for alternatives to increase their own money supply — by themselves. Either working harder, or starting doing educational events, or whatever. So, you'd have a reduced user base, yes, but not such a drastic one as you'd imagine.
_____________________

Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
10-07-2005 14:45
From: Kris Ritter
"Stipends should stay because I lack imagination" :rolleyes:

You do? Maybe that's why you left the game.

coco
_____________________
VALENTINE BOUTIQUE
at Coco's Cottages

http://slurl.com/secondlife/Rosieri/85/166/87
1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12