New Economy Plan!

EK · Post by EK » Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:17 pm

I'm really glad everyone is keeping a good attitude about this- we didn't want the plan to have to come to this but it did unfortunately- I applaud the ToO user's attitudes toward this. Thanks for the support! $\:D/$

JesusIsAlive · Post by **JesusIsAlive** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 3:14 pm

I diddo everything that Garfield, Jon, and Jonathan said.

I don't really care about the money.

Abigail · Post by **Abigail** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm

Odie wrote:I diddo everything that Garfield, Jon, and Jonathan said.

I don't really care about the money.

I double diddo everything Odie said.

hubcap · Post by **hubcap** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:16 pm

I think that you guys are doing great so far!

for those of you who are freaking out about the lost of money, wow. that is a little sad. Jonathan said what I want to say pretty well. So read that instead of this.

Fenix · Post by **Fenix** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm

From the general consensus it seems that no one really cares about the money so why not just take it out completely?

Stubborn · Post by **Stubborn** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:20 pm

I don't think it should be taken away completely. It was put here for fun (I assume...) and it should stay here for the same reason.

DanP740 · Post by **DanP740** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:21 pm

*sits outside city limits by the Trank Tank, sitting on a strongbox, surfing the web on a laptop, playing guitar, and eating canned goods over a fire*

EK · Post by EK » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:24 pm

Fenix wrote:From the general consensus it seems that no one really cares about the money so why not just take it out completely?

They don't care about the money at this point in time due to it not having worth due to inflation.

It would be sweet if we could do items without money but alas- we cannot.

Trent DeWhite · Post by **Trent DeWhite** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:25 pm

DanP740 wrote:*sits outside city limits by the Trank Tank, sitting on a strongbox, surfing the web on a laptop, playing guitar, and eating canned goods over a fire*

Ooh, three of my favorite hobbies in the world! $\:D/$

WINDSHEAR · Post by **WINDSHEAR** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:39 pm

Fenix wrote:From the general consensus it seems that no one really cares about the money so why not just take it out completely?

Now that,... would cause me to take up arms.

I want a reset of this game, not have it taken away from me. I've found it very enjoyable.

Clodius Albinus · Post by **Clodius Albinus** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:14 am

All of my worthless and soon-to-be non-existent funds to the first person who can identify the type of efficiency that results when any of those worsened by a change could, in theory, be compensated by those whose lot has improved without reverting the beneficiaries to their original state or worse!

Kait · Post by **Kait** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:36 am

Clodius Albinus wrote:All of my worthless and soon-to-be non-existent funds to the first person who can identify the type of efficiency that results when any of those worsened by a change could, in theory, be compensated by those whose lot has improved without reverting the beneficiaries to their original state or worse!

*reads*

*reads again*

*reads several times more*

Could you repeat the question?

Homeward bound · Post by **Homeward bound** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:05 am

Clodius Albinus wrote:All of my worthless and soon-to-be non-existent funds to the first person who can identify the type of efficiency that results when any of those worsened by a change could, in theory, be compensated by those whose lot has improved without reverting the beneficiaries to their original state or worse!

Umm...I dunno.... Compassion? Welfare? Financial Aid?

Jonnyboy12 · Post by **Jonnyboy12** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:17 pm

*wishes he hadn't spent all of his money on soon to be worthless degrees*

darcie · Post by **darcie** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:33 pm

Clodius Albinus wrote:All of my worthless and soon-to-be non-existent funds to the first person who can identify the type of efficiency that results when any of those worsened by a change could, in theory, be compensated by those whose lot has improved without reverting the beneficiaries to their original state or worse!

Umm... I almost understand! But my only guess would be socialism... but I wouldn't think you would call that "efficient."

Clodius Albinus · Post by **Clodius Albinus** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:06 pm

Okay, let's do this with an example:

If we had a very bizarre society in which everyone made either $100,000 or $30,000 / year (presume that there are an equal amount of each_, and we stumbled upon a policy that would bring everyone earning $30,000 / year up to an annual income of $60,000 while only dropping the wealthier tier down to $90,000 / year. Theoretically, the beneficiaries (those now earning $30,000 more / year) could pay those harmed by the policy off in such a fashion (e.g., transfer payments of $10,000 to $29,999) that no one is worse off and at least some are better off, though absent this theoretical transfer, that is not strictly the case.

There's a name for the type of efficiency where no one's condition is worsened and some have their lot improved. I'm asking for the other case, where some benefit and others are harmed, but the net benefit for some members of society is enough that we could, through transfers, achieve an efficiency of the former type. This policy would bring out an efficient outcome of what type? (There's a name for it.)

EK · Post by EK » Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:12 pm

Pareto Efficiency?

Clodius Albinus · Post by **Clodius Albinus** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:41 pm

No; a Pareto-optimal outcome would be the other one I described, in which none see their condition worsen, and the lot of at least one improves. Good try, though; any other takers?

Laura Ingalls · Post by **Laura Ingalls** » Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:20 pm

Okay, I'm just reading this after being gone for 4 days.

Wow...this is drastic.

While I don't "care" a whole lot about the fake money, it is kinda depressing that all the cash I earned from posting and so forth is going to be erased...blah. Oh well.

And being gone means almost everything in the shop is now gone before I could buy anything. I was the only one who owned my mod doll and now they're all bought....

*sigh*

Sherlock · Post by **Sherlock** » Thu Oct 11, 2007 1:55 pm

Clodius Albinus wrote:All of my worthless and soon-to-be non-existent funds to the first person who can identify the type of efficiency that results when any of those worsened by a change could, in theory, be compensated by those whose lot has improved without reverting the beneficiaries to their original state or worse!

Posnerian.