Maintain Capitalism and Free Market

SL is a virtual world with a [mostly] capitalistic orientation.

I just want to voice my support for the continuance of a capitalistic state.

Capitalism allows all users to attain their full potential through their own efforts. If you have a great idea/product, you get to reap the full benefits of your hard vested efforts.
In this way, the only limits to your success are your abilities. A capitalist believes that you aren't entitled to anything. You deserve what you can earn.

Socialism and other non-capitalist based philosophies believe that there are certain universal entitlements. They believe that the wealth of the talented should be spread around to all. They believe in bureacratic entities to regulate aspects of what you can and cannot do. While on the surface it may seem as if they are making the world more equal, what they are really doing is constraining the freedom of some to "bring up" the standards of others. Socialism is a restriction of freedom, not an empowerment of it.

Please voice your support for pure capitalism and the right to unfetterdly pursue your dreams.

Dude, you might want to look up the definition of capitalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

As for free market, that will never be the goal here. The goal is to organically grow the metaverse by whatever (hopefully moral) means possible

I think you'll find few disruptve, revolutionary changes to our environment as LL appears to be apropiately risk averse, but I doubt you'll ever find that it'll be a true free market.

This is kind of being discussed in the "scam" thread.

The things I would like to see more of in SL would be financial companies and financial markets. Things like banks, loan companies, investment companies, equity market etc.

The free movement of cash to better investments.

Its pretty close to pure capitalism right now. I just hate seeing changes proposed that diminish the unfettered free market.

Roll back to 1.1!

Turn L$ back into monopoly money! Better yet - banish it altogether and establish a barter system!

Just offering an alternate point of view.

I'm with Kris. o.o

Whee! Let's start a revolution, kitty!

Actually I think SL is doing quite well because there is so much free enterprise and very little capitalism going on!

There is no internal contractual means of going into debt, therefore most enterprises are supported by their creators, and product creators get to keep the results of their hard work. With no huge up-front capital costs, capitalism is not necessarily a religion we have to worship here.

My view is that there are too many different people in the
world (first and second life) to be able to dictate how people
should think. I don't think the Lindens want to do that either,
as they say they just provide the "space"... WE create the
world.

Personally I'm all for capitalism and the free market, and
I have a vision that in the near future there will be MANY
people earning their FL income in SL ! It's the dawn of
a new era.

But, just as FL... there will be segments of the population
that choose to be socialist, anarchist, capitalist, etc.
The interesting part will be to see how that's implemented.

Perhaps we'll end up forming different "contents" or
countries of like-minded people.. where capitalism thrives
in one part of the world, while the socialists can make
there thing happen in another part of the world.

The LAST thing I want in SL is to see hardcoded restrictions
that would prohibit any group of people to pursue their
own dreams and goals.

Gabrielle

Free enterprise IS capitalism.

But who would want to live in a socialistic world? The content creators would flee to the capitalistic areas, leaving the socialistic areas with nothing - and nobody to build because there would be no incentive.

Now, it could get interesting if the Lindens made it so that when you are "born" (create your av) you were born into a certain geographic area and had to contend with its economic structure, politics, etc etc and could not leave.

That would be very interesting indeed!

It is true that we have a very diverse set of communities in our current population. It makes me wonder why LL insist on treating us a single community. I suppose they have to wait until we're willing to let them accomodate the special needs of groups and individuals without screaming favourtism at them.

They do more than provide the space though. They police us rather than afford us the tools to police ourselves; they provide stipends and ratings bonuses to use even after we're old enough to establish our own incomes; and they ration land, our one true commodity, to support the value of the linden and balance the economy. That's not an exhaustive list, but it's a far cry from just hosting the grid. We create the bulk of the content; but we still rely on them to enforce order and maintain the world.

blaze, I, you, I, just, woosher, I'll just update my sig and leave it at that.

First of all, it's nice to hear my opinions are shared with Gabrielle on this one. Segmenting the general whole is probably going to be what ends up happening, and in ways is happening already with the popularity of the personal sim.


I'd like to point out that matters are not as black and white as this, and honestly you'd be surprised. Certain structures are actually bent on "roleplaying" niche government regimes in Second Life already! (even if that's a polite way to put some of them... )

I firmly support the right to "live freely" just as I support the right to sever yourself from certain areas of the world that you do not agree with. Google and search engines have allowed this for years with the ability to "filter out" content you're not looking for - I think this is just an extension of that.

Shameless quote: "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." So long as saying it is not at the expense of everyone else.



This misses the point, even if it's an amusing tangent. The bottom line here is to promote freedom of ideas, not to force a certain ideology down residents' throats at the getgo.

They are not one and the same! You can have free enterprise without debt, shareholders, private banks, etc. here. In other words, creators do not depend on an investor class (capitalists).

I realize use of the term capitalism has devolved over time and now pretty much stands for any form of economic activity that goes on without government intervention. My point here is that the people who DO the work, create the content, are not beholden to any private forms of control either! Capitalism is not just the free market, it's also about how the bank owns my house, and a large group of investors own the companies I do work for, and everyone keeps getting paid more for the money they invest in things than do the people actually producing. See, most free enterprise here is not capitalist but simply free.

I wanted to make two points. First, Im not so sure about "capitalistic orientation" ... there are a lot of people giving everything away for free, which doesn't seem very capitalistic to me. And it would seem to me that in a "capitalistic orientation" effective advertising would be a lot more prolific and easier to come by, marketing events would NOT be "frowned on", etc.

Second, Im not so sure about "right to unfetteredly pursue ..." It occurrs to me that some fetters are desirable, things like morals and ethics. "Anything goes" in the name of capitalism does not strike me as progress. Skirting the edges of legality to take advantage of someone doesn't seem to me to be either moral or ethical, although it might be legal. That doesn't make it desirable.

Just my opinion.

I totally agree. Though I feel Jamie is correct that "much of the world exists on a capitalist bent," I think this distinction is extremely subjective and in ways reflects the current promotional campaign of Second Life itself!

And for the record, I support ideas that shy away from "extremes." Moral or ethical highground at the expense of personal safety and creature needs is probably a bad idea. Counterpoint, greed and narcissism at the expense of morals and ethics is equally, but polarly, a bad idea.

I think that what we need here isn't one singular ideology that we can all agree with. Instead, we need to be able to agree to disagree, and to allow others to exist in their own realms of thought so long as they're not harming others. Capitalism and personal gain are fine, so long as the opposing ideology exists freely. Same with the reverse.

Long live capitalism!

Someone ought to start a Galt's Gulch sim.

That would be so cool.

Just like in the Real World, eh ! (I'm typing this from a communist country people with high tradeable skills flee the country while people who benefit greatly from the State's subsidies fight tooth and nail to keep the taxpayers' money flowing -- at themselves, that is)

The current system allows people to willingly join preferred forms of government/society (Port Kar, Neualtenberg, etc...)

IMO SL has more of a libertarian capitalist economy, in the sense that businesses are not granted any actual-citizen rights, so there's no investor protection, for example. This places the emphasis on self-supported entrepreneurship, which I think is a Good Thing.

Jamie, you might want to get some facts and read some History before spouting off like this.

It's nice to hear your opinion, but most of this is just that, your opinion only. I am certain that you have no real ideas what Socialism is for example.

Furthermore, please present your opinions, *as* opinions, not as "facts," Because these so-called facts are really quite dubious.

Jamie please stop this nonsense. I find your comments offensive.

Lots and lots of people want to live in a Socialist world. I know the real problem here is that you just dont understand what the word "socialism" means, but your ignorance is no longer cute.

It's offensive.

Please go away and read up on this stuff before you crap all over peoples beliefs.

Perhaps you should take your own advice. Capitalism brought Europe out of a state of cronic starvation. Socialism brings starvation everywhere it goes. You might want to look up people like Ayn Rand, Bastiat, Ludwig von Mises or Rothbard for an accurate definition of what capitalism really is and most importantly, what it is not.



I do. Socialism is that terrible form of government that inspires people to run into the wheel of an airplane as it takes off, cross the atlantic, and after the trip be glad you did it. It's that form of government that requires walls with armed man to keep people from leaving. It's that form of government that makes society grey and unhappy. It's that form of government where the producers are looted to such an extent that they mostly just stop producing.



Hundreds of millions of deads are not opinions, they are facts.

Socialism is darkness:




Socialism is desperation:

I find your comments much more offensive.



Until they live in it for a minute.



Your ignorance has never been cute.



It's offensive.



Perhaps you should take your own advice. I read the communist manifesto when I was 12. I have read the writings of anarco-socialists, leninists, and social-democrats. They are all evil. They have all butchered people, literaly and figuratively and have no respect for the dignitiy of human life, only of their decadent form of greed. I hope you are only naive. At least you can't kill people in Second Life. You can destroy their livelihood, but not their life. Socialism would destroy Second Life before you could say "yay!".

You are aware the majority of Countries in Europe are Socialist in some degree?

As is Canada.

In fact the US has very limited socialistic institutions - it had more 30 years ago
Like: THE US MAIL
Previously a state sponsored monopoly like - AT&T


There is a marked difference in Socialism as a concept and Socialism in practice.

The same can be said for Communism. - in fact China's manipulation of their currecy value is placing them at an extreme advantage over the US in what amounts to a trade war.

Yes there are countries that suffer from Communism - is interesting though to wonder ; how much is the suffering cuased by the system and how much is becuase the corrupt people in power maintaining a totalitarian state.

Were the US to become a Dictatorship even if we stayed a "Republic" and "Capitalistic" would we fare so much better?

Or would we like Rome, eventually decay becuase of our loss of freedom.