Petition to Balance the Linden Federal Deficit

Jamie is not an economist. She is just an alarmist avatar who bilks newbies by selling objects she didn't create and are offered free from other locations.

She advocates taking stipends away from paying customers, so she can get more money for her dubious actions.

Stipends will not be going away Jamie, ever. Get over it.

* EXACTLY WHAT WEEDY SAID* nothing is more true then those words.


It wouldnt bother you so much if YOU werent cashing out any chance you got.
Just some common sense Bergman.

Only a handful of people are crying over this. No one else really cares.
Real, fair, honest, hardworking and reliable people arent too concerned over a few pennies lost on the lindex.

Fear mongering in the forums only causes panic sellers to panic-sell, it may just bring the value of L$ up to 350 soon if you keep crying about it.

Jamie-

You had a perfectly good thread already for this topic, and yet,
you created an unnecessary and redundant thread anyway?

What do you think that does to the value of your message?

They will if the Capitalists have anything to say about it. Communism is dead, why do you hang on to it?

It needs to be heard. No matter what all the Communist Osteriches say, this is a big deal. We don't all want to live in stinky communes. Some of us want our white picket fences and SUVs.

Don't assume we want your squalor.

hehe I'm not an economist either - it just struck me as I read the words that what was being portrayed seemed the exact opposite of what seemed to be going on.

I guess we all associate surplus as being a good thing - and yet it seems to be whats there...

Jaime is just jumping on a bandwagon - someone probably explained the mechanics of the scheme at long last, although I've not seen 'the usual suspects' in some time.

Actually the main criers I've not heard from since LL talked about 'introducing money' I suspect because it sort of blows the main plan out of the water.
-----
Explanation to those who came in late:

The loudest folks on the forums here cry out for all forms of money going into SL be plugged, first for developer incentive, then dwell, now basic stipends - next premium stipends.

Their arguments all center around 'balancing the economy' but they never argue the other side - the sinks.

The idea being if you plug all the money going in, money is still destroyed out of the economy and you buy high.. as the money reserve dwindles you sell out as late as you can then jump ship before the economy totally dies.

or - if it picks up again you rinse and repeat if you can.

I think though LL isn't as gullible as they would like though.

Although I'm not a fan of the idea - stipends are going out - the writing was on the wall with the TOS change allowing LL to sell money on lindex 'as needed'.

Any 'protests' will probably go as swimmingly well as the 'tax revolt' at the start of the taxation plan (now gone). The protest didn't stop it from happening.

Voice your approval/dissaproval by all means - but then shelve it. thread after thread after thread won't change whats already decided - take that energy and channel it into adjusting how you'll do whatever you do after the fact.

FFS will you learn to spell Ostrich?

Your so called self-appointed antagonists have nothing to say about it. You are not Linden Lab...never will be either.

Suggesting I am clinging to communism is idiotic and absurd, no wonder why your threads lead nowhere, loser.

The US economy is a little helpless lol, this is a videogame. So how about LL starts making the economy stable cause this is seriously getting out of hand.

I am no economist either, but stipends are here to stay. I said it before, and I will say it again..... LL has a legally binding and affirmative responsibility to provide weekly stipends as a result of contractual obligations with the subscriber base. I do have extensive experience in class action litigation however, and any attempt to remove stipends would present a huge legal challenge. This is why LL removed the stipends from new basic residents only.

So to the advocates of stipend removal, you can piss and moan all you want....but stipends are here to stay. I agree with you Siggy when you say that not nearly enough emphasis is applied to the "sinks". Any reasonable thinker would agree that economies are based on balances, not penalties. A perfectly good example of LL "dropping the ball" would be the implimentation of P2P. Telehubs should have stayed and a fee for P2P not only would have "sank" alot of money, but competitors like ROAM etc could have remained in business.

And thats the funny bit of it - when they introduced telehubs (before that we had a paid P2P teleport system) I asked 'why take away and replace? why not both?'

And when they went to impliment P2P back again I asked the same thing - and even used paid P2P (flat fee why not 10L) and a free telehub system as a suggestion.

I will never for the life of me understand why they did that.

Well I'll wait till they go back to telehubs again and make the same suggestion I suppose

Speaking of P2P - I'll chalk up the script functions for teleporting as a 'godot'

It already was. Repeating it over and over and over you're merely increasing the thread deficit* on the subject.

*) in your sense of deficit, anyway...

From the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition:
DEFICIT: The amount by which a sum of money falls short of the required or expected amount; a shortage: large budget deficits. A business loss.

So I'm confused.... you say there's too many Lindens backing up the pipes, which would by definition be the opposite of a deficit, ya?

For someone that claimed to be SL's top economic mind, a certain someone never thought to look up that word....

always with the communism defence.
Why are you so afraid of communism? oh yea i forgot, your a self-proclaimed "capitalist legend".

funny if you were a capitalist you wouldnt complain about money since you'd be rich,
and if you were a legend you wouldnt have so many people hating on you!

cheers!

A government paying out "stipends" is not automatically running a communist economy. Especially when you have paying members supporting the economy, and following stipends to ANY degree, while still being allowed to own property, and set their own prices for selling things, as well as the opportunity for individual profit.

According to the way you are twisting it, the United States would be considered a communist economy because it pays out Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, as well as providing Food Stamps.

Just because a government provides monetary allowances to it citizens does not make it communist.

I agree that there is indeed a Deficit. Continually Less dollars coming in per Linden being created. The same as the Government "borrowing" money that it does not yet have by simply printing it. This is usually balanced out at some point when the government recieves this money back.

As you and others have said, the economy must be balanced for it to remain stable, but simply removing payments does not solve the problem. It will take the increased management of sinks.

As long as there are currently outstanding contractual obligations between LL and a resident that involve the presence of a stipid for the resident, the stipend WILL REMAIN for that resident until that contract expires. The removal of that residents stipend could only legally occur at the time of the contract renewal, under new terms offerend by LL.

I, myself, am a proud Capitalist. However, once again, government subsidies do NOT = Communism.

I have the ultimate solution to the SL economy,
take all of Jamie Bergmans money, give it out to the poor newbies she ripped off.
So they can spend it on other items. LoL

oh sorry that could be considered communism in her book.!

Jamie-

And here I thought you'd prefer 'gated community' because picket fences aren't very good at keeping the lower classes from helping themselves to your capitalistic trophies.

If LL wants to keep or toss stipends... that's their business decision and I respect it. I'll be fine in either case.

My point was merely that by crying wolf in new thread... after new thread... you're encouraging people to ignore all your new threads. Unless of course they can mock you... which of course is probably why you continue to mis-spell 'ostrich' ... because people will auto-bump your threads to correct your spelling.

Do you really think this got your message out any better than bumping your existing thread? (which I'm still subscribed to by the way... )

I agree with you 100% Josey, whatever LL choses I will stand by it as well.!

As you stated elsewhere, Jamie:

/130/2d/109364/1.html



Given this rule, how probable is it premium stipends will ever die?

Any redistribution of wealth is, by definition, Communistic.

Granted, Gated Communities are preferred. However, this is beyond the realm of possiblity in the RW for many, so I chose to stay with 'picket fence' because almost any hard working Capitalistic American can attain this.

I thought it was "socialism," not "communism"

My guess is very. Just based on past stippend reduction trends, and LL's Lindex related profits.

They're both way too pink for my green blood.

Where's your capitalistic sense of competition and ambition?

Why "settle" for just a picket fence?

And why care whether others get their's or not?

More, better, faster, cheaper!