New L$ trading level low - L$317 / $1 USD.

Just because someone makes a mistyake in setting something up, does that make it morally correct for you to take advantage of it's flaws to hose others? I still think the solution is obvious, ban all third party sales of L's. Require that cashouts are done through LL only, then if pl wanna buy buy at a small markup with all things done at a fixed rate. Solves the problem and even gets rid of something for you to scream about

This is obviously the comment of a total moron. Not all of us have a mommy and daddy to cover thousands per quarter for those jobs you so brilliantly welcome. Besides a lot of those are geting outsourced now also. Your's will sooner or later. All you are saying you are in favor of here is an economy in which ultimately the entire nation will be well on the way to the botom of poverty level. What they need to do is make it too expensive to ship imports in and force ppl into manufacturing here. Outsourcing is the worst thing that ever occured to the US economy. And what stinking good does it do having lower prices on stuf when no one can get a stinking job to be able to aford them erven if they were only one tenth the price they are now.

Hi Dmitri

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

Read this.

If it wasn't for outsourcing, we'd all be seriously screwed right now.

Outsourcing and globalisation is the only thing keeping gas prices from not destroying us all, economically.

The reason prices are not skyrocketing everywhere is because globalisation is keeping prices down.

Also, the reason we haven't all nuked each other is because we depend on each other economically.

Spoken like a true Socialist. If you don't like something, you try to
control it and reign it into the model that fits your vision of the world.

Sorry... Banning all 3rd party sales of L$ is impossible.... As long as
I own L$ in SL, I can always post a promissory note on eBay saying
that I'll sell L$100,000 for US$300/bucks. When you win the bid, you
pay me via PayPal. I then log into SL and give you L$100,000...

How would you stop such a 3rd market transaction Mr. Socialist?
Believe it or not, when you try to control "markets" all you do is
move them underground and outside of your control.

Remember the old saying?
keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer

If LL shut down the LindenX, they will give away all their power to
black market trading of L$...

You rock Anna... Glad to know we have some smart people around
here who can understand free markets...

Imagine if TVs were still made in America? Flat Screens and Plasmas
would cost the price of a Hummer or Lexus... And if you spent all that money
on 1 product, you have nothing to spend on anything else. Which translates
into a depressed economy.

Thank God for China and India.. Offshoring has made the goods we consume
cheap, which allows us to spend more money in multiple sectors of the economy.
That means low unemployment and a healthy economy..

So all those rock throwing anti-globalization people can jump off a bridge.

You could stop selling freebies to newbies who don't know any better. That might help, as they might be willing to spend more on Lindens if they weren't getting ripped off freebie-selling parasites all the time.

Even if that didn't work, it would help reserve the RL money that is flowing into SL for people who have a right to sell the stuff they're selling. Kinda encourage content design instead of discourage it, y'know?

I know, the concept of intellectual property rights means nothing to a self-proclaimed capitalist giant such as yourself, and you're much more comfortable lamenting the price of Lindens in one browser window while underselling them in another, but I thought it was at least worth mentioning:

While we're on the subject of dropping Linden prices (and this thread seems to have taken on the tangential quality of a game of Telephone, so I'm not sure we still are), does anybody have any numbers indicating that the drop in the Linden actually reflects an economic decline?

Agreed. I personally would accept 1024m2 more free tier (bringing it to 1536 m2) in the stipends place. Leaving the first land at 512 m2 would enable that larger 'free' teir to encourage mor eland buying. Which would mean Linden flow. Which would possibly revive the economy. With dwell going (which was my suggestion of inserting any needed 'extra' cahs in should sinks get too high) I don't know how this would affect the economy.

I know some people think this is important, but I'm tiring of reading this every time Jamie posts. We know already, we get it. I don't think selling freebies is great either, but can we move on? Enough is enough, and Jamie still has a right to speak.

Doesn't mean we need to take a morals lesson from someone lacking them, or advice on how to fix the lindex from someone who does continually undercut.

It's even worse than that.

why did the south lose the war, class?

It's because they did not have the centers of manufacturing that the north possessed

when you are faced with a national emergency, whether natural disaster, disease, war, or any other calamity, you have to retool your factories to meet the demand of that emergency. If you do not have the factories to begin with, you lose.

Jonas, these "people" are going to use the system as far as possible making every possible dollar. They do not care if they destroy second life and those that invest in it as long as they make a "profit". They used name calling in their speach to quiet others.

Dont be worried or upset by what they say. These type of people are in the process of destroying the economy of the United States and others to make their "profit".

Yum Yum I love cheap global labor

The world is really too small nowadays to worry so much about national boundaries. The market is global.

if the STIPEND is causing the L$ to drop so bad...due to flooding the economy with "NEW" money every week, would it not be possible and even more ethical for LL to buy existing $L off the Lindex to pay as prepromised stipend ? Maybe im looking at it too simpley, but seems to me this might be the solution...

Which deprives LL of the revenue they get from their premium memberships.

They're a business... not a charity.

Seems they get quite a bit on land teir fees, so i am sure theyre not hurting, and they would also get the discount on buying fees for $L, am assuming they wouldnt charge themselves the 3% we have to pay to buy, i dunno seems like the solution to me..and the flood of new money would drastically slow down...orrrrrrrrr if they were really sincere, cut out the stipend but compensate tier payers with drastically reduced rates..that too would cut out all the "NEW" money but at the same time not make it a punitive issue to the memberships that were promised something for the luxery of a premium account. Its a situation where someone has to bite the bullet, seems like LL should sholder some of this situation as well...

Well in fairness Jonas, who is really giving the moral lesson? And undercutting is in no way wrong, and furthermore, that's a supposition, you can't possibly be privy to Jamie's Lindex activities. The point has been made, ad nauseum.

It's the 21st Century now, you dig?

Allow me to enlighten you.








She ADMITS she undercuts, so yes, I am privy to that at least, which is on PUBLIC FORUMS. This thread in fact.

So whats been made ad nauseam?

For the morals argument: I never said she was this time, but I was making a point. Someone who has no vested interest in stabalizing the lindex, only contributing to the downslide, should not be making a fuss over the downslide, nor should they bother making suggestions that they won't follow themselves.

So I undercut... so what? All smart people do. Sell your L$ today because they will be worth less tomorrow.

I'm smart.

Jonas I just don't agree that setting your own price, or 'undercutting', is contributing to the downslide. That's just how things work. It doesn't negate a vested interest in stabilising the Lindex. You asked Jamie "sell above the current rate'. She replied, fairly, that she had a right to liquidity. You have no way of knowing how different Jamie's price is... for all you know, she could be selling at $312 when the price is $311. Is that so evil? Regardless, you have the right to set your own price, whatever that price is. Where that price gets set is ultimately determined by other factors. 'Undercutting' is not the cause of the Lindex woes.

The ad nauseum bit: she sells freebies. Ok we get it it. I understand your view of it. I think such a practise is pretty crap too. It's just the point has been made well and truly, that's all. For me at least. Trial by forum is never particularly nice, whatever the crime, and it's getting repetitively dull. That's just my opinion though, do as you feel fit. k?

"suggests" is more accurate than "ADMITS".

Regardless.

Call it undercutting or not...

Every system will grow until it reaches limiting factors. They may be soft limits that merely curb behavior resulting in stabilization... or they may be hard limits that result in sudden collapse. Populations of preditor and prey for example. A good year for sheep will no doubt lead to a good year for wolves shortly after. Then suddenly there's too few sheep and the wolves begin to starve.

We have a buyer's market. The problem is... our sellers (wolves, if you will) aren't starving and dying off. They can operate at a loss and stick around month after non-profitable month, competing with the other sellers for insufficient quantity of buyers (sheep) to sate them.

The solution? Shoot a few wolves? Doesn't help. Makes the remaining wolves fatter, stronger and more likely to draw new wolves into the area. More sheep? Well, that's the model we're in now, trying to breed enough more sheep to keep Linden Lab in business, despite the 'share' that the wolves take.

Curious that Linden Lab actually decided to create a 'wolf friendly' sheep ranch.

(Sorry, I got swept up in analogy land)

--
Look out for the sheep in wolf's clothing.

Didn't mention freebies as attributing to the lindex. No matter whats sold, its lindens.

Its what I see that the undercutting is the main reason the lindex keeps dropping. Person a sells at 302. Person b undercuts to 303. Person c comes along posts at 304. Person a takes theirs off and posts at 305.

Even if its only one point is a -continual- downslide. Cutting stipends or dwell won't affect that.I don't want to give up my stipend so someone whos been wrecking the system can get a do over. Its like taking Little Johnny's toys away because Little Billy broke all his and needs new toys.

You were saying?