EVE Search - eVe economy balancing thread.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

eVe economy balancing thread.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jack StarMule Minmatar Minmatar Ship Construction Services	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:18:00 - [31] I agree that it would be useful for CCP to at least consult economists before making major changes to the economy. That being said, just like Physics, there are many schools of thought surrounding economics. Some better than others at describing certain facets of economy. I personally am a believer of the Austrian School (laissez faire) and the OP here is obviously Keynesian school (interventionist socialist). Each of us has theories regarding economy. Each of us has a different take on what a balanced economy is. How does CCP decide which economic theory is the correct one? Put another way; As a physicist do you subscribe to the String theory camp or the Quantum Mechanics camp? Both have reasonably legitimate ways of looking at the universe. Both come to the observable facts from very different angles. Which is the "right" answer? Unfortunately, you and I both know that we don't have the answer to that question. Likely we're all wrong, on one level or another.
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:28:00 - [32] Originally by: Jack StarMule Keynesian economics have no place in a video game economy. They screw up the real world enough, tyvm. QFT ------------------ "If you ever need anything, please don't Hesitate to ask someone else first."
Izzy Pol Fear and Loathing in LoneTrek	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:35:00 - [33] Change "RL economist" to "emo internet nerd with no clue on tax" If you were an RL anything you would know tax is levied on income. Capital comes into it on disposal. With your system people would have 0 disposable ISK and either have to earn like crazy or liquidate to pay taxes.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:36:00 - [34] Originally by: Jack StarMule I agree that it would be useful for CCP to at least consult economists before making major changes to the economy. That being said, just like Physics, there are many schools of thought surrounding economics. Some better than others at describing certain facets of economy. I personally am a believer of the Austrian School (laissez faire) and the OP here is obviously Keynesian school (interventionist socialist). Each of us has theories regarding economy. Each of us has a different take on what a balanced economy is. How does CCP decide which economic theory is the correct one? Put another way; As a physicist do you subscribe to the String theory camp or the Quantum Mechanics camp? Both have reasonably legitimate ways of looking at the universe. Both come to the observable facts from very different angles. Which is the "right" answer? Unfortunately, you and I both know that we don't have the answer to that question. Likely we're all wrong, on one level or another. I wouldn't call the OP Keynesian. The OP tries to directly influence inflation through taxation, Keynesian economics assume a possibility to influence real growth through varying taxation over the economic cycle, which will only indirectly influence inflation (if such policy is succesful). I also think that a Keynesian policy would in all likelyhood increase inflation during a downturn if the policy were effective. The OP seems to be trying to mimic monetary policy through fiscal policy, which I can't directly contribute to any school I know (albeit my knowledge there is rather rusty I admit). I doubt any such school exists tbh. since in RL we do have monetary policy, which is absent in Eve. -------------- In completely unrelated news, after careful research, the Guiding Hand Social Club concludes that no member of the Guiding Hand Social Club is guilty of corptheft.
Stamm Amarr Three Holdings Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:41:00 - [35] Originally by: Mr Mozzie I think it is quite simple; CCP should hire real life economists to watch over the eve economy. Lots of people think that economics is some made up arbitrary bs that has no real world meaning. It isn't so. The laws of economics are just as compulsory as the laws of physics, (I say that as a physicist). In other words, you wouldn't build a bridge without an engineer, so why would you have an economy without an economist, (especially if the economy is in a rapidly changing environment). You don't need to be an economist to understand how the Eve economy works. It's very simple. What CCP need for the economy is number crunchers - which I believe they already have. Galaxian Recruitment Info
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:48:00 - [36] Originally by: Izzy Pol Change "RL economist" to "emo internet nerd with no clue on tax" If you were an RL anything you would know tax is levied on income. Capital comes into it on disposal. With your system people would have 0 disposable ISK and either have to earn like crazy or liquidate to pay taxes. WTF? Tax can be levied on income/profit, consumption and wealth. If you happen to live in a country where there is no wealth tax, do not assume it isn't possible or doesn't exist. And I can assure you taxes on wealth do exist. Whether in the form of a direct tax on bank accounts at the end of a fiscal year (which do exist in some countries), or in say the form of a real estate tax, which is just another tax on wealth. Similarly, some countries do not have a VAT, but that does not mean that taxing of consumption does not exist. It exists in various forms, from VAT to excise taxes and everything in between. Please stop blabbing about stuff you obviously know nothing about. -------------- In completely unrelated news, after careful research, the Guiding Hand Social Club concludes that no member of the Guiding Hand Social Club is guilty of corptheft.
Drykor Minmatar Stormriders Fimbulwinter	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:57:00 - [37] I'd say no to this. Regardless of the lack of 'experience' grinding, this game already has a harsh grind if you want to pay for your ships. I don't want to be spending time in a GAME just to KEEP my current isk amount. I think it's fine the way it is, except for the tech2 lottery but that is being taken care of now. If you want to be rich in here, you have to work pretty hard, by for example being in an alliance that can hold high level complexes or good ore/npc regions. This is all just fine.
wierchas noobhunter The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.03.22 14:59:00 - [38] oki who is flaming and acting not nice to jenny gona get war dec, random gank or other not wery nice stuff tbh STFU noobz hello i am wierchas !!!! i pown yooooo
JourneymanDave devastation mining inc	Posted - 2007.03.22 15:06:00 - [39] Originally by: Bosie Originally by: Jenny Spitfire I want to make my post credible by declaring that I am a RL economist with many years experience. I would like to make my post credible by declaring that I am a RL taxpayer with many years experience: No. Perhaps the best response ever, and a man after my own heart.
Jack StarMule Minmatar Minmatar Ship Construction Services	Posted - 2007.03.22 15:07:00 - [40] Originally by: Malachon Draco I wouldn't call the OP Keynesian. The OP tries to directly influence inflation through taxation, Keynesian economics assume a possibility to influence real growth through varying taxation over the economic cycle, which will only indirectly influence inflation (if such policy is succesful). I also think that a Keynesian policy would in all likelyhood increase inflation during a downturn if the policy were effective. The OP seems to be trying to mimic monetary policy through fiscal policy, which I can't directly contribute to any school I know (albeit my knowledge there is rather rusty I admit). I doubt any such school exists tbh. since in RL we do have monetary policy, which is absent in Eve. I must admit he never proclaimed any particular school. I did make a possibly incorrect determination based upon his interventionist attitude that if he in fact has any formal training in economics it would be from a school which believes it has the ability to influence the market in any manner. The Keynesian school is decidedly popular here in the States in our many and varied liberal universities. A shame, really, but I digress. I too agree that Keynesian policies would likely cause an increase in real inflation (not just monetary inflation) thereby causing the amount of time and production required to increase to acquire the same goods. This would be a negative effect on a video game, because you would spend more time in secondary activities in order to participate in the primary activities that you enjoy. My real concern is related to all of the talk of "inflation" both by developers in their blogs and in threads here. I've yet to see any real inflation problems in the game. If anything it appears to be getting easier to acquire goods for use. This is typical of a free market in the real world. Goods and Services are easier to achieve with less work. Production increases any time there is a perceived market for the item. The cost of purchasing an item is constrained to a reasonable profit above the raw material cost. The only exception to this appears to occur in places where artificial scarcity exists. Unlike in the real world, this artificial scarcity can be a good thing, depending on the developers wish to balance the availability of any especially powerful items. Developers have full control over this aspect and should maintain it.
Taran Summers The Merovingians	Posted - 2007.03.22 15:17:00 - [41] Bah. Fuel tanks on all ships. Fuel consumption is adjusted by ship mass. Fuel prices adjusted daily by CCP to deal with inflation. More expensive ships take more cash to fuel. Making it a progressive expense. And you get a new class of ships. Tankers. For doing things like refilling Titans. Or filling up those new fuel silos you'll need at your POS's
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Requiem of Hades	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:13:00 - [42] We do have monenatary policy - nerf or control the depreciation of ISKs due to ISKs faucet and it is good in eVe. Keynesian works in eVe because it 1) encourages producers to manufacture goods just in time. Overstocking of goods, warehousing and stockpiling will be taxed under assets. 2) destroys macros because overmining equates to stocking more assets and larger wallets. Assets and wallets are taxed. 3) encourages empire dwellers to PVP because collecting stuffs are taxed eventually. 4) forces players to get rid of items quickly by changing ownerships, lose in combat or do not farm unnecessarily. 5) forces players to own what they need. If monthly GDP goes out of control, eVe bank can increase tax and it would influence players and market behaviour. The foundation of taxation would be used to introduce different kind of taxes to control node lags, etc. If there are too many people in Jita, CCP could introduce hub or empire tax and tax toons on their total days spent in empire over a tax period. Tax is wonderful, isn't it? --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Esurnir Amarr Bears Inc FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:38:00 - [43] Eve is free economy, there is no such things as dev intervention there. If you find that your raven is getting more expensive, then produce it ! The mineral price in high end is hitting the dirt, low end is going up. What to do ? Drop mining crockite and take your hulk back to amarr and mine veldspar. If the price of low end mins is going up then it's surely not the fault of macro miners . If the price of mins is going down, and the price of goods is going up, then what do you wait for. Build goodies ! ---- Quote: Thou shall pew pew. Book of Revelation 12, 51
Darina Rea Renua Foundation	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:40:00 - [44] Edited by: Darina Rea on 22/03/2007 21:38:31 It would mean my wallet would be 'in the red' soonish as they say. Consider this, not everyone plays all the time, unlike in RL where you always (want to) have a steady income per month that can be taxed, in EvE sometimes I make lots of millions, sometimes nothing. But my assets will increase, unless my ship gets blown away. So when I do make an income I would not be paying for 1 month, but for all months my assets have just been doing tax collecting for me. This tax idea only encourages people to not have assets lying in places around the cluster, encourages to spend all ISK, not save for that one nice ship, it hits industrials harder then anyone else because they have to keep large supplies of minerals (sure, they make the most aswell). Anyway, a time induced tax will make the buying power of casual players smaller, due to playing and earning habits, and the people who already have the billions of ISK to spend will hardly feel it. Hence, bad idea. - Also I suck at math, but logic is great. _________ The cluster is full of mysteries, all that is needed is the will to find and unravel them. Time is on our side.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:42:00 - [45] Originally by: Frug TAX NEWBIE CORPS Thank you. /signed - Originally by: CCP Sharkbait think the problem is found. last startup now.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Requiem of Hades	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:44:00 - [46] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Frug TAX NEWBIE CORPS Thank you. /signed Every entity has to be taxed or the economy can't be balanced. Players in NPC and PC corps must have their wallets and assets taxed. Corp wallets and assets in hangars must be taxed too. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:45:00 - [47] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Frug TAX NEWBIE CORPS Thank you. /signed Every entity has to be taxed or the economy can't be balanced. Players in NPC and PC corps must have their wallets and assets taxed. Corp wallets and assets in hangars must be taxed too. No, just normal tax of a low rate in the NPC corps, kthxbye. - Originally by: CCP Sharkbait think the problem is found. last startup now.
Etruscus	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:56:00 - [48] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Frug TAX NEWBIE CORPS Thank you. /signed Every entity has to be taxed or the economy can't be balanced. Players in NPC and PC corps must have their wallets and assets taxed. Corp wallets and assets in hangars must be taxed too. I am pretty sure this idea is simply snark... but just in case it isn't. You can't speak about inflation of some goods and services without speaking about deflation of other goods and services. No comprehensive study of the net change in inflation has ever been studied in eve, much less reported. My hunch is that overall the economy experienced a slight deflation after revelations. Most T1 ships prices are selling for around 5% less then before rev and this doesn't even include the transaction cost (tax) that we all must pay. Some mineral prices are higher. Some mineral prices are lower. Those products which rely on lower end minerals will be relatively more expensive then those using higher end minerals. Inflation isn't necessarily a bad thing. In the real world it is bad because it is cited as the main cause of unemployment in the long run. There isn't such an analogue in eve. That said, one of the major causes of inflation in eve is because players and corporations do not absorb the costs of risk. These costs of risk are simply absorbed into the system of insurance contracts and other risk mitigating vehicles. In my opinion, insurance contracts should be player based. Where contracts are bought and sold on the open market. Where corporations would offer insurance contracts. That said, this isn't likely because it would mean things going boom less often. Lastly, a tax on assets would actually cause inflation. Individuals will avoid this tax by storing their wealth in other vehicles, such as minerals and ships, causing an artificial mineral and ship shortage.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Requiem of Hades	Posted - 2007.03.22 21:59:00 - [49] Originally by: Etruscus Lastly, a tax on assets would actually cause inflation. Individuals will avoid this tax by storing their wealth in other vehicles, such as minerals and ships, causing an artificial mineral and ship shortage. All items in market are valued by moving average. Minerals and ships are assets. They can be valued and they can be taxed. --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Ansuru Starlancer The Phoenix Rising Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:00:00 - [50] Originally by: Ronaldson No taxation without representation Dont tread on me I live with property tax, income tax. sales tax, death tax hell more dang taxes than this nation went to war over a tax on assets would mean I would have to work on making isk, key word WORK this is a game I would rather have fun at. making isk isnt something I want to be forced into doing just to keep my ships The taxes that sparked the Revolution amounted to only a couple percent of a merchant's income. They'd commit suicide if they saw what we pay to Uncle Sam today! :D
FreelancerAlpha	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:07:00 - [51] Unbelievable. What vile posts. I like to insulate myself from the truth sometimes, and explain the callous, selfish nature of government taxation away as being the byproduct of thoughtless bureaucracy. Individuals who just want to expand their budget here and there, or close a perceived loophole. Yet here stands such a respected member of the boards, listing as boons of taxation, almost every reason that people hate taxation. It is bad enough that we do not own our characters. To make us pay RL $, then ingame ISK, just to maintain a character would be beyond forgiveness. You may be an economist, but you do not understand humanity at all. If CCP wanted to put in any tax that nibbled at my characters while they lay idle, I would expect (at the very least), more alt slots, the ability to queue training, and the ability to train all slots at once. Even Blizzard reversed their negatively moving ranking methods in WoW. Too many players would fight the backward draw, then burn out and quit. NCsoft modified their negative experience repercussions for pvp as a result of players actively cheating or avoiding certain obstacles/pitfalls so that they wouldn't undo their work. Hell, CCP doesnt even make your character lose the difference in sp between your sp and your clones' sp. Negative movement is very bad.
Genericforumalt Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:21:00 - [52] I know this thread is about being an armchair economist but for THE LOVE OF GOD CAN YOU STOP CALLING IT "eVe"?!
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:24:00 - [53] Taxes won't do anything. Over all value will remain the same, regardless of calling it isk or dollars. A widget is still a widget and will always be worth one widget. The real control over the economy that can be excercised is supply over time. Want prices on X to come down, then release more X per time. No matter how much you "tax", ISK is unlimited. M1 is meaningless in Eve, the money supply is unlimited. All that can be addressed is how fast it is created. If CCP took 10% of everyone's ISK, prces would not move at all, not one bit. If CCP increased Zyd supplies, then Zyd prices would fall ... we can see that first hand. Soon we will see it in t2 as well as invention gets its needed adjustments. Lots of supply is good for Eve. The margins on t1 frigs aren't worth the time to players that can build battleships. But they are worth it to the player that can just now build frigs. Once invention gets going, the margins on t2 ammo won't be worth the time to the player than can produce t2 ships. Supply allows the margins to drop and as such creates oppertunities for lower level players because higher level players will move up to the next level of production / mining / missions whatever. Another good effect of lots of supply is that risk is less expensive, less expensive risk leads to more risk taking, more pew pew, more fun, more folks willing to go out and do something other than poking oles in veldspare rocks, Chibbra as the exception of course. -AS
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:26:00 - [54] I pay sales tax, broker fees, corp tax and who knows what else already, so screw that! I bet your a democrat.
Petrothian Tong Gallente	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:36:00 - [55] Edited by: Petrothian Tong on 22/03/2007 22:36:00 errrm, the idea is sound and all.. but... errr honestly, it would reduce the "fun" value for causal players who cant grind to pay the taxes.... and it means unless you got more than a hours to play a day, you probley have to get rid of everything except a few frigs and a cruiser...to keep the tax bearable... good idea for removing isk from the game.. but .. not a fun one... EDIT: oh and it wouldnt touch the people with GOOD T2 BPOS.. the parts for T2 stuff cost nothing to stock up... they dont over produce anyways (just in time manufacturing) to keep their profits up. and yeah since they (the ones with GOOD T2 bpos, IE: hulk, cerabus...) get insane profit margins for their goods... the tax wont hurt them one bit...but will hurt casual (heck, most people who dont bring in insane bucks..) much much more... would promote elitism =P hehe... -Siggi- ""PvP" isn't only direct person to person combat, it can be very indirect. Selling an item on the market which somebody buys from you is resulting in another guy not getting a sale." Oveur
Dread Phantom Caldari Project-Chaos	Posted - 2007.03.22 22:42:00 - [56] "toons" oh god /shoots self
Redbad Minmatar Be Inspired Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.22 23:17:00 - [57] Edited by: Redbad on 22/03/2007 23:15:35 I am already investing in the new skill: - Tax Evasion V Even more simpeler, just loose a few '0' (zero's) in those large numbers. Problem solved join us today!
Mr Mozzie Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.03.22 23:30:00 - [58] Edited by: Mr Mozzie on 22/03/2007 23:33:05 Originally by: Jack StarMule I agree that it would be useful for CCP to at least consult economists before making major changes to the economy. That being said, just like Physics, there are many schools of thought surrounding economics. Some better than others at describing certain facets of economy. I personally am a believer of the Austrian School (laissez faire) and the OP here is obviously Keynesian school (interventionist socialist). Each of us has theories regarding economy. Each of us has a different take on what a balanced economy is. How does CCP decide which economic theory is the correct one? Put another way; As a physicist do you subscribe to the String theory camp or the Quantum Mechanics camp? Both have reasonably legitimate ways of looking at the universe. Both come to the observable facts from very different angles. Which is the "right" answer? Unfortunately, you and I both know that we don't have the answer to that question. Likely we're all wrong, on one level or another. I think you misunderstand how physics works. There is no such thing in physics as a quantum mechanics camp, or a string theory camp. Classical mechanics (all of the Newtonian stuff) is really good at explaining the everyday world as we see it. When you get to a much smaller scale it turns out that things become quantum mechanical. The laws of physics don't change, rather quantum mechanical behaviour approaches classical behaviour as size and mass increases. It is a similar situation with string theory and quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics does not describe the structure of the elementary particles (electrons, protons etc) and why they interact. String theory kind of explains these things, even if it is un-testable. But string theory still works where quantum mechanics because its laws once again approach those of quantum mechanics. So like I said, physics isn't divided into camps of people who are arguing over which version of physics is right. It is entirely consistent to use classical mechanics, quantum mechanics and string theory. Moving onto the economics. When I say CCP should hire economists, I do not mean they should hire the type of economist that are members of a certain RL macroeconomic economic policy camps. Economics does not just apply to RL economies, as others have suggested on this thread. It also applies to artificial economies like that of eve. With all due respect to CCP, if they hire economists, they should be ones who have an interest in understanding exotic economies. They should be able to explain to CCP how the eve economy works in laymanÆs terms. Also, they should be able to understand CCP's intent for the game and advise them on the economic consequences of their æinterferenceÆ with the game. Edit 1: didn't change anything... Edit 2: finished a few sentences
Etruscus	Posted - 2007.03.23 01:45:00 - [59] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: Etruscus Lastly, a tax on assets would actually cause inflation. Individuals will avoid this tax by storing their wealth in other vehicles, such as minerals and ships, causing an artificial mineral and ship shortage. All items in market are valued by moving average. Minerals and ships are assets. They can be valued and they can be taxed. This is then a disincentive for individuals to invest their time into producing any sort of wealth. They will shift their time from producing pseudo wealth here in Eve to other places, such as Hashem help us, WoW. if your answer is that it will affect everyone equally and there will be no net change, then why bother with the tax? There will be no net change. It serves no real purpose. Not for inflation control, not for anything frankly, accept possibly to encourage investors of time (players) to invest their time elsewhere. Even so, this certainly wouldn't be the case. How could I be reasonably sure that my assets wouldn't be eroded by this tax over time? Let's assume for a moment that I wanted to take a 6 month break, how then would that affect my assets? Would the wealth that I created with my own labor then be seized by the state? Wouldn't this risk of asset of erosion then be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices causing yet more inflation? I dare say it would. Maybe if I get spunky later I'll look up some relevant studies suggesting this fact.
Fenderson OLE Mining Corp Miners With Attitude	Posted - 2007.03.23 01:58:00 - [60] forgive me if this has already been posted but: how to dodge taxes in eve: step 1) buy lots of mega / zyd / morphite / officer and faction mods / etc step 2) anchor a bunch of secure cans in safespot in your favorite system step 3) fill cans from step 2 with stuff from step 1 vioa! instant eve tax shelter. sigs are for the weak

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.