Stipend Add in $L but Tier Sink in $US flawed...

Regardless of all the other ins / outs, arguments and rationalisations -

Do most people agree that having your main economy addition in $L (Stipends) and your main economy sink in $US (Tier) fundermentally flawed?

In fact come to think of it Tier isn't a sink because it does not remove money from the economy - Doh!

I think having tier paid in real-world money keeps Linden Labs and SecondLife afloat.

Perhaps but when I paid for a year was promised the stipend of L$500 a week for 52 weeks. All I have ever asked for is for Linden Labs to fulfill their contract.

What do you expect from a company based in San Francisco anyway?

Yes Logan, but wouldn't paying it in $L if the $L were removed effectively do the same thing in the end?

I am not an economist but would that not mean that people would need to buy $L for a good reason and then it would both balance stipends and support a stable $L?

I realise that LL will have all the considered options etc and have come up with the current policy but still I think it is flawed.

Ranma - I am not saying there is anything wrong with stipends, I am saying it would be logical to balance the economy with Tier as a true sink and that the treating these two LL income streams as seperate (premium accounts & tier) if they are ultimately linked by the process of the economy is flawed.

They cut your stippend already???