An appeal to intellectual honesty.. call it a TAX.

[JeanneAnne]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

some assumptions went into that estimate & i dont know how reasonable those assumptions were ..<snip>

overall operating expenses would be reduced when bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments were eliminated 

Jeanne

 

---

What assumptions did you make about "bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments" that Linden Research may or may not be paying?    I don't think that information is publicly available.   When do you say they last paid a dividend to shareholders and how large was it?   

---

why isnt this information publically available? what are they hiding ??

the assumptions i referred to have to do with how many residents & players would buy into a user owned cooperative .. how many we would have to divide operating expenses between .. what percentage of concurrent players would contribute .. things like that

Jeanne

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

some assumptions went into that estimate & i dont know how reasonable those assumptions were ..<snip>

overall operating expenses would be reduced when bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments were eliminated 

Jeanne

 

---

What assumptions did you make about "bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments" that Linden Research may or may not be paying?    I don't think that information is publicly available.   When do you say they last paid a dividend to shareholders and how large was it?   

---

why isnt this information publically available? what are they hiding ??

the assumptions i referred to have to do with how many residents & players would buy into a user owned cooperative .. how many we would have to divide operating expenses between .. what percentage of concurrent players would contribute .. things like that

Jeanne

 

---

What gives you a right to know?

What stake do you have in LL?

How would you determine what is a "bloated" amount?

What would you do or say if you discovered that the compensation was actually sub par?

I'm assuming you have a job.  Did you settle for a minimum wage position or did you look for something more lucrative?

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

---

What gives you a right to know?

What stake do you have in LL?

How would you determine what is a "bloated" amount?

What would you do or say if you discovered that the compensation was actually sub par?

I'm assuming you have a job.  Did you settle for a minimum wage position or did you look for something more lucrative?

 

---

i have a right to know how much the parasites are sucking .. why shouldnt you & i know? if they werent ashamed of themselves over how much theyre exploiting their employees & those who support them by paying tier .. they wouldnt wouldnt hide this information

i have a stake in SL because i like it .. LL rules SL like some 3rd world dictator .. i have a stake in knowing what theyre up to so i can oppose them .. i wouldnt care if i didnt like SL

 

anything above the mean reimbursement of the population is bloated

"sub par" compared to what? to the minimum wage? to the mean wages of the People? sub par relative to the online gaming community? wouldnt surprise me one bit that LL pays ther employees less than most gaming companies do

i took a job that was offered to me & i was qualified for .. it pays more than minimum wage but doesnt pay all that well .. especially since i had to move away from home & pay rent in order to take it .. it pays just enuf to cover my expenses & ltl more .. iv thota bout looking for something that pays better but iv thot even more about quitting & just going home & living like i use2

Jeanne

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

---

LL is a privately owned company.  As such, they have no obligation to share company information with the public.

I've worked off and on for my mother's company (which is privately owned by her and her business partner) and she doesn't even share all the details with her own family members.  Nor, should she have to.   Privately owned means just that...private.

If you want to contact LL and make an offer to buy the company, and if your offer is serious, then perhaps they would share information with you.

If you want to start a user owned Co-Op type virtual world, then Open Sim, would be the place to do it.   There are already several co-op type grid arrangements out there...I belong to a Sci-Fi grid which operates under a similar umbrella group.

---

& i have no obligation to give em a cent of real money .. so long as LL is a secretive authoritarian sociopathic cash sucking corporation .. they dont deserve a cent of real money from me .. if you dont mind transfering wealth to em then please do!

same goes for your moms company

i dont want to make LL an offer .. i want residents & players to organize, set up a non-profit consortium, collect dues or fees .. & for the non-profit cooperative to make the offer

i talked to my brother about hosting an open sim type grid .. he has 2 young children & doesnt have time for it .. i prolly will explore other virtual worlds eventually .. & if i find something i like better than SL ill be thrilled .. for the time being tho .. i like SL .. i just dont like the corporation that milks it as a cash cow w/out dealing w/ griefers or providing any useful user assistance & who arbitrarily imposes ToS w/out any input about what WE want

Jeanne

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

as for running costs .. a very rough estimate made months ago in this forum came to about $15 per month each .. some assumptions went into that estimate & i dont know how reasonable those assumptions were .. but i think that $15 per month is in the ballpark

 

---

Which is more than the current premium membership of which many, such as yourself, choose not to pay.  How would you then propose to make this idea viable if there are those who carry the cost while others play for free?

LL certainly won't give it away, that's not a thought out rational idea at all, they have capital investors who will want an ROI and giving away their investment isn't it.

The reality is that you have no stake in SL.  You don't pay, nor are you a shareholder so cannot vote.

The costs involved are really not something that seems to come naturally to you, datacentre running costs and software developers (more than just "technicians" to change back up tapes here) are required and by the time you've ended up with a team on board to look after it, you have effectively re-employed the LL staff.

Others have commented about there being no need to disclose financials but where I live, I can request the financial records of companies from the office where they have to be registered annually, i'm sure the same exists in the US.

Go through the accounts and bring some realistic figures to the table, I suspect you'd be somewhat surprised.

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

---

What gives you a right to know?

What stake do you have in LL?

How would you determine what is a "bloated" amount?

What would you do or say if you discovered that the compensation was actually sub par?

I'm assuming you have a job.  Did you settle for a minimum wage position or did you look for something more lucrative?

 

---

i have a right to know how much the parasites are sucking

---

1)   LL is not a parasite.  A parasite relationship is where only one participant benefits, and the other is harmed. 

A parasite if something that feeds off of a host.  Usually weakening, irritating and damaging the host in small increments, but not enough to kill it.  This arrangement varies for length of time, but normally ends when the host either dies, or the parasite moves on to a different stage in it's life-cycle.  Examples for humans are tapeworms, head lice, and bed bugs.   A parasite attaches to, bites, or enters the host and is not wanted by the host. 

 

2) LL is a symbiont.   In symbiosis, two of more biological species interact with a mutualism, which benefits all participants.   People log into SL of their own free will.  No one is forced to be in SL, nor are they forced to spend money in SL.  Each person that logs into SL does so because they benefit in some way.  Some people have businesses, some do education, or socialize, performs or listen to music, etc.  Jeanne, you have stated many times in these forms that you enjoy SL and you and your sisters do all manner of things inworld, including DJ jobs, family RP and other activities.  

Businesses, whether they are small or large, only exist because people do business with them.   The relationship is one of mutual benefit.  One voluntarily exchanges money for good or services.  But, it does not even have to be traditional "money" that is exchanged.  One can exchange labor or other goods.  There are lots of business models that vary from the traditional one of currency exchanges.  But, what they all have in common, is that they are voluntary, and each participant benefits in some way.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

---

LL is a privately owned company.  As such, they have no obligation to share company information with the public.

I've worked off and on for my mother's company (which is privately owned by her and her business partner) and she doesn't even share all the details with her own family members.  Nor, should she have to.   Privately owned means just that...private.

If you want to contact LL and make an offer to buy the company, and if your offer is serious, then perhaps they would share information with you.

If you want to start a user owned Co-Op type virtual world, then Open Sim, would be the place to do it.   There are already several co-op type grid arrangements out there...I belong to a Sci-Fi grid which operates under a similar umbrella group.

---

& i have no obligation to give em a cent of real money ..

---

Of course not.   Businesses operate under a relationship of voluntary exchange.

[JeanneAnne]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

as for running costs .. a very rough estimate made months ago in this forum came to about $15 per month each .. some assumptions went into that estimate & i dont know how reasonable those assumptions were .. but i think that $15 per month is in the ballpark

 

---

Which is more than the current premium membership of which many, such as yourself, choose not to pay.  How would you then propose to make this idea viable if there are those who carry the cost while others play for free?

LL certainly won't give it away, that's not a thought out rational idea at all, they have capital investors who will want an ROI and giving away their investment isn't it.

The reality is that you have no stake in SL.  You don't pay, nor are you a shareholder so cannot vote.

The costs involved are really not something that seems to come naturally to you, datacentre running costs and software developers (more than just "technicians" to change back up tapes here) are required and by the time you've ended up with a team on board to look after it, you have effectively re-employed the LL staff.

Others have commented about there being no need to disclose financials but where I live, I can request the financial records of companies from the office where they have to be registered annually, i'm sure the same exists in the US.

Go through the accounts and bring some realistic figures to the table, I suspect you'd be somewhat surprised.

 

---

paying a premium membership fee gives you no say in how the corporation is run .. being a member of a members owned cooperative would give you a say in how the cooperative was run .. i would expect a certain number of people to leave SL if they had to pay a membership fee .. but i would also expect other people to be drawn to a virtual world in which they had a say in how it was run .. i would expect that most of those who chose to leave would be non-paying users & those with a major stake in the toy economy .. which wouldnt exist anymore

im not so sure .. SL is in decline & a positive feedback is in operation: the more SL declines the more the factors contributing to that decline predominate & the faster the decline occurs .. a tier strike could accelerate this process to the point where LL might be willing to give SL to a users consortium since they were going bankrupt anyway .. or at the very least it might make the price they ask for SL more affordable

yes i do .. my stake in SL is the enjoyment i receive from playing SL .. which is considerable .. & the risk of loss of that enjoyment .. LL mismanagement risks all of us who enjoy SL loosing the stake we have in it .. & the fact is that you currently have no vote even if you do pay to play SL .. my proposal would change that

i would say that i have a clear view of the real costs involved in running SL because i count those costs as carbon footprint & other environmental costs that most "externalize" & dont even consider .. if we rehire the LL staff i propose giving them a raise & increasing their benefits

thats a good suggestion Sassy .. i wish someone would go to the trouble to do the research you suggest .. not me tho .. too tedious

Jeanne

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

---

What gives you a right to know?

What stake do you have in LL?

How would you determine what is a "bloated" amount?

What would you do or say if you discovered that the compensation was actually sub par?

I'm assuming you have a job.  Did you settle for a minimum wage position or did you look for something more lucrative?

 

---

i have a right to know how much the parasites are sucking

---

1)   LL is not a parasite.  A parasite relationship is where only one participant benefits, and the other is harmed. 

A parasite if something that feeds off of a host.  Usually weakening, irritating and damaging the host in small increments, but not enough to kill it.  This arrangement varies for length of time, but normally ends when the host either dies, or the parasite moves on to a different stage in it's life-cycle.  Examples for humans are tapeworms, head lice, and bed bugs.   A parasite attaches to, bites, or enters the host and is not wanted by the host. 

 

2) LL is a symbiont.   In symbiosis, two of more biological species interact with a mutualism, which benefits all participants.   People log into SL of their own free will.  No one is forced to be in SL, nor are they forced to spend money in SL.  Each person that logs into SL does so because they benefit in some way.  Some people have businesses, some do education, or socialize, performs or listen to music, etc.  Jeanne, you have stated many times in these forms that you enjoy SL and you and your sisters do all manner of things inworld, including DJ jobs, family RP and other activities.  

Businesses, whether they are small or large, only exist because people do business with them.   The relationship is one of mutual benefit.  One voluntarily exchanges money for good or services.  But, it does not even have to be traditional "money" that is exchanged.  One can exchange labor or other goods.  There are lots of business models that vary from the traditional one of currency exchanges.  But, what they all have in common, is that they are voluntary, and each participant benefits in some way.

---

good post CN !!

the distinctions between parastism & mutualism are never absolute .. whatever favors the Darwinian fitness of each symbiont involved will be selected for .. what favors fitness depends on many factors such as vertical or horizontal mode of transmission, population size, host specificity .. etc .. sometimes its in the fitness interest of the parasite to kill its host quickly .. sometimes not .. likewise its often in the fitness interest of the host to tolerate a certain parasitic burden for the sake of maintaining some degree of immunity .. thanks for discussing biology with me !!

youre correct about there being a degree of mutualism involved to the relationship between me & others to SL .. i do enjoy the fun i have in SL .. i still contend that this mutualism is so one sided that it constitutes parasitism tho .. while i may enjoy some entertainment from SL there are others getting rich off it .. & what do those parasites really contribute? its the programmers & technicians actually involved in the nitty gritty of keeping the grid running .. not the bigshot money suckers who make the poor decisions that negatively effect us all

Jeanne

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

paying a premium membership fee gives you no say in how the corporation is run .. being a member of a members owned cooperative would give you a say in how the cooperative was run .. i would expect a certain number of people to leave SL if they had to pay a membership fee .. but i would also expect other people to be drawn to a virtual world in which they had a say in how it was run .. i would expect that most of those who chose to leave would be non-paying users & those with a major stake in the toy economy .. which wouldnt exist anymore

im not so sure .. SL is in decline & a positive feedback is in operation: the more SL declines the more the factors contributing to that decline predominate & the faster the decline occurs .. a tier strike could accelerate this process to the point where LL might be willing to give SL to a users consortium since they were going bankrupt anyway .. or at the very least it might make the price they ask for SL more affordable

yes i do .. my stake in SL is the enjoyment i receive from playing SL .. which is considerable .. & the risk of loss of that enjoyment .. LL mismanagement risks all of us who enjoy SL loosing the stake we have in it .. & the fact is that you currently have no vote even if you do pay to play SL .. my proposal would change that

i would say that i have a clear view of the real costs involved in running SL because i count those costs as carbon footprint & other environmental costs that most "externalize" & dont even consider .. if we rehire the LL staff i propose giving them a raise & increasing their benefits

thats a good suggestion Sassy .. i wish someone would go to the trouble to do the research you suggest .. not me tho .. too tedious

Jeanne

 

---

 

Paying a premium member fee does give a say in how the company is run merely by NOT paying and going elsewhere, you are voting with your $'s. 

Being a shareholder is another option.

Being neither of these, there is no bargaining power whatsoever, let me explain:-

Protester

"I'm going to refuse to pay all the $'s that I give you, that will make you take notice"

Corporate representative

"Oh, that would be bad, how much of your revenue will we lose?"

Protester

"$0"

Corporate rep

"Bye"

 

You can have all that you ask for with Open Grid but don't forget that Open Grid and clones exist because of the software engineering done by LL.

[Solar Legion]

I see this thread has been busy since the last time I saw it ...

I also see that the insane idea of the users getting Second Life in any manner was still being discussed as if it had any merit whatsoever or was founded on any resemblance of reality.

Reality is this: You don't pay anyting at all - you don't even have the sort of "stake" in the software as those who have sat down and tried to fix the bugs in it.

Content creators? Their "stake" is much different as well. They used the software to bring their creative visions to life and have to pray that Linden Lab won't ever pull the plug.

The only stake in Second Life that has any real meaning to the Board is a monetary stake. And not even Premium Members pitch in enough to be much more than a blip on their radar. Single Sim Renters (no, you don't own the sim - you rent it from Linden Lab) register as the tiniest specks of dust on their screen. Huge Estate renter? They certainly register.

Jeanne - you have o stake in Second Life that the Board cares about.

[Medhue Simoni]

Well, I didn't read all the posts, so I don't know if any1 has pointed this out. A sales tax is a tax put on top of the price and paid strictly by the purchaser. On the marketplace, the merchants pay the commission, which is exactly why it is called a commission. It might not seem like a big distinction but it is. The distinguishing part is who pays it. Plus, a sales tax has a specific purpose, which is to tax for something outside of actually running a marketplace. A commission is something paid by the merchant to the supplier of the service or site, for the distinct purpose of supplying the service or site.

[Phil Deakins]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

What gives you a right to know? 

---

i have a right to know how much the parasites are sucking .. why shouldnt you & i know? 

---

You don't have a right to know at all. You're not a paying customer so you don't have any rights at all. You're merely a guest without even the right to complain about anything.

[Phil Deakins]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

i dont want to make LL an offer .. i want residents & players to organize, set up a non-profit consortium,

collect dues or fees

.. & for the non-profit cooperative to make the offer 

---

And how much in the way of dues and fees would you put in?

Don't answer that. I already know the answer - nothing.

---

i talked to my brother about hosting an open sim type grid .. he has 2 young children & doesnt have time for it .. i prolly will explore other virtual worlds eventually .. & if i find something i like better than SL ill be thrilled .. for the time being tho .. i like SL .. i just dont like the corporation that milks it as a cash cow w/out dealing w/ griefers or providing any useful user assistance & who arbitrarily imposes ToS

w/out any input about what WE want

 

---

You don't have the right to want anything in SL. You're merely a guest here, and guests don't get a say, or even a view, in how things are.

[Medhue Simoni]

JeanneAnne, I'm guessing, is a total socialist. What she fails to see is that SL could be hailed as the only "Free Market" in the world. It shows just how successful a truely "free market" can be. All of the failures of SL are directly attributed to the failures of LL, and have nothing at all to do with the players in the market. If LL adopted a more "free market" attitude within it's own company, it would likely be a huge success.

If not for the constant socialist propaganda inflicted onto us on a daily basis, socialism would be dead and  be seen as the real parasite that it is. Socialism has nothing at all to do with freedom. This is easily proven as the only way to implement it, is to use force. Without the threat of force, socialist policies would never be excepted by the masses.

On the other hand, free markets and capitalism prove themselves to be the core of freedom. No1 has to force any1 to do anything. Everything gets allocated correctly, and price correctly, as the market and the free will of people send all the proper signals to allocate things properly. As soon as you take away the market from the equations, which is socialism, then you get corruption and mismanagement. None of the big players have any market forces from restricting it, leading to monopolies.

Whether you live in a socialist society or a capitalist society, the market forces will always be at work. Market forces are akin to Karma. You can't control it, much like a raging river. To try and act against it will only cause more harm than good. It is better to flow with that raging river and you see all the benefits that the river can bring. When socialism is implemented in any market, you will see shortages, as all the incentives to produce in that market have been taken away. In a totally free market and capitalistic market, there will always be abundance, as long as peolpe are willing to pay the price. Any shortage in a capitalistic market presents itself with high prices. Every1 can see this. The result is that people clamour to get into that market, eventually eliminating the shortage and lowering the price.

[Solar Legion]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

JeanneAnne, I'm guessing, is a total socialist. What she fails to see is that SL could be hailed as the only "Free Market" in the world. It shows just how successful a truely "free market" can be. All of the failures of SL are directly attributed to the failures of LL, and have nothing at all to do with the players in the market. If LL adopted a more "free market" attitude within it's own company, it would likely be a huge success.

If not for the constant socialist propaganda inflicted onto us on a daily basis, socialism would be dead and  be seen as the real parasite that it is. Socialism has nothing at all to do with freedom. This is easily proven as the only way to implement it, is to use force. Without the threat of force, socialist policies would never be excepted by the masses.

On the other hand, free markets and capitalism prove themselves to be the core of freedom. No1 has to force any1 to do anything. Everything gets allocated correctly, and price correctly, as the market and the free will of people send all the proper signals to allocate things properly. As soon as you take away the market from the equations, which is socialism, then you get corruption and mismanagement. None of the big players have any market forces from restricting it, leading to monopolies.

Whether you live in a socialist society or a capitalist society, the market forces will always be at work. Market forces are akin to Karma. You can't control it, much like a raging river. To try and act against it will only cause more harm than good. It is better to flow with that raging river and you see all the benefits that the river can bring. When socialism is implemented in any market, you will see shortages, as all the incentives to produce in that market have been taken away. In a totally free market and capitalistic market, there will always be abundance, as long as peolpe are willing to pay the price. Any shortage in a capitalistic market presents itself with high prices. Every1 can see this. The result is that people clamour to get into that market, eventually eliminating the shortage and lowering the price.

---

I'm sorry but, just as Jeanne's assertions do not hold much water, neither do yours.

 

The Human proclivity for Violence, Greed, Decadence and all manner of negative segments of our very nature prohibits the existence of a truly "free" market.

 

When you remove all the checks and balances to allow the market to do as it wishes ... it will do just that. Larger corporations WILL form trusts and monopolies. They WILL do anything they can to crush their comeptition. They WILL seek to increase their profits at the expense of everything else.

This holds true for every market sector out there, just look at the banking industry, real estate, software, hardware, media ... When unckecked, the market is overwhelmed with those who will stop at nothing for their own personal gain.

This is even evident among the users of Second Life. People will lie, they will find ways to 'cheat', they will use software to 'steal' .... 

No - the "free market" you're describing is not only an impossibility ... it may as well be a myth.

[Medhue Simoni]

Ok, you wanna do the whole broken record thing. Great! See, there is actually evidence to back up what I say, and it's all around us. What you are talking about doesn't have anything to do with free markets or capitalism. What you are talking about is completely illogical. Why? Because all of those things you describe have never come about in a completely free market, or even a relatively free market.

On the contrary, Socialism has been tried and tried and tried, in many, many different forms, yet people continue to idolize those principles. The whole concept is illogical in so many ways, beside it only being able to exist by using force. It was Einstein that said, something to the affect, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result".

A Free Market is not government giving hand outs to their favorite corporations. A Free Market is not government restricting access into a market with licenses. A Free Market is not patents handed out to corporations to restrict competition. A Free Market is not government giving a limited group a license to broadcast and advertise for the mega corporations. A Free Market is not governments taking over whole market sectors. A Free Market has no regulations. A Free Market has nothing to do with tarrifs, or taxes. A Free Market is not people forming unions, which are immune from the crimes they commit. A Free Market is not a lawless nation with no courts for those that have been wronged, as all the basic common law practices still apply. This could go on and on but what I'm trying to say is that no current government engages in Free Market principles.

The crazy part is, you admit, at the end, that there are no Free Markets, but your whole comment before that implies that there are Free Markets and they have all these problems. So, which is it? You want to blame things on the Free Market or Capitalism, and then you admit there have never been any true forms. Read the title of this forum thread. It's an appeal to intellectual honesty, which you don't seem to understand the concept. You contradict yourself and can't even see it.

Now, I used SL as the closest thing to a Free Market that most of us have ever seen in modern times. It is not a perfect Free Market, as there is no court system, or use of common law principles. That said, the best protection of the consumer is the consumer educating themselves, and not relying on corrupt governments to protect them. We do see this in SL, and people learn quickly. Word of mouth and free speech allows consumers to tell each other who are the bad merchants. When governments engage in regulations, those regulations are generally created by the large corporations to further restrict access into their markets, and the government promotes these regulations as consumer protections. LL even restricts free speech, here in the forums, which I think is totally wrong. I'm all for people calling out merchants that engage in bad business practices, and letting the public decide on their own. As a large merchant in SL, I have no fear of being called out, as I don't engage in such activities. If I were to be falsely accused, I'd have thousands of friends and customers that would rush to my defense, and the accuser would quickly be seen as the fraud they are.

Again, I did not say that SL was the perfect example, but it still survives today under this Free Market system, no matter how much LL messes things up. If not for the vast mistakes that LL has made, SL would still be thriving and growing.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

JeanneAnne, I'm guessing, is a total socialist.

---

I've no idea if she's a total socialist or not. What I'm sure of is that she is a super-fault-finder. She mostly finds great fault with whatever is in front of her at the time. She reminds me of someone from years ago. I've never been a union person but I was necessarily in a union for a short time. We had a shop floor meeting about a pay rise. One guy at the back kept shouting any negative thing that came into his head on the subject - just for the sake of being negative - a super-fault-finder. At one point he actually shouted "We don't want a pay rise!", just for the sake of shouting something negative. He really did. The rest of what he shouted was against the company, etc. (that he'd only just joined a matter of days earlier), but that one took the biscuit.

[Solar Legion]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Ok, you wanna do the whole broken record thing. Great! See, there is actually evidence to back up what I say, and it's all around us. What you are talking about doesn't have anything to do with free markets or capitalism. What you are talking about is completely illogical. Why? Because all of those things you describe have never come about in a completely free market, or even a relatively free market.

On the contrary, Socialism has been tried and tried and tried, in many, many different forms, yet people continue to idolize those principles. The whole concept is illogical in so many ways, beside it only being able to exist by using force. It was Einstein that said, something to the affect, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result".

A Free Market is not government giving hand outs to their favorite corporations. A Free Market is not government restricting access into a market with licenses. A Free Market is not patents handed out to corporations to restrict competition. A Free Market is not government giving a limited group a license to broadcast and advertise for the mega corporations. A Free Market is not governments taking over whole market sectors. A Free Market has no regulations. A Free Market has nothing to do with tarrifs, or taxes. A Free Market is not people forming unions, which are immune from the crimes they commit. A Free Market is not a lawless nation with no courts for those that have been wronged, as all the basic common law practices still apply. This could go on and on but what I'm trying to say is that no current government engages in Free Market principles.

The crazy part is, you admit, at the end, that there are no Free Markets, but your whole comment before that implies that there are Free Markets and they have all these problems. So, which is it? You want to blame things on the Free Market or Capitalism, and then you admit there have never been any true forms. Read the title of this forum thread. It's an appeal to intellectual honesty, which you don't seem to understand the concept. You contradict yourself and can't even see it.

Now, I used SL as the closest thing to a Free Market that most of us have ever seen in modern times. It is not a perfect Free Market, as there is no court system, or use of common law principles. That said, the best protection of the consumer is the consumer educating themselves, and not relying on corrupt governments to protect them. We do see this in SL, and people learn quickly. Word of mouth and free speech allows consumers to tell each other who are the bad merchants. When governments engage in regulations, those regulations are generally created by the large corporations to further restrict access into their markets, and the government promotes these regulations as consumer protections. LL even restricts free speech, here in the forums, which I think is totally wrong. I'm all for people calling out merchants that engage in bad business practices, and letting the public decide on their own. As a large merchant in SL, I have no fear of being called out, as I don't engage in such activities. If I were to be falsely accused, I'd have thousands of friends and customers that would rush to my defense, and the accuser would quickly be seen as the fraud they are.

Again, I did not say that SL was the perfect example, but it still survives today under this Free Market system, no matter how much LL messes things up. If not for the vast mistakes that LL has made, SL would still be thriving and growing.

---

 

Excuse me? There's no "broken record" here Medhue. I'm speaking from a position of fact and from a position of reality. There has never been a truly free market, nor has there ever been one which operates as your idealogical variation is described.

You are blind and/or naive if you truly believe what yiu're saying here - you want to invoke the title of this thread? Fine. Go back, reread and try to actually comprehend what is being said: A truly free market of the sort you believe in is impossible. Human nature precludes it.

There is no contradiction - I showed you why it cannot exist. I even showed you why your use of Second Life is a flawed example.

I'm only going to say this once: Starry eyed idealism is not "Intellectual Honesty".

[Medhue Simoni]

I'm not totally against unions, but lets be honest about why they come about and who they favour. IMHO, unions come about because of the vast number of people that are insecure. They do not believe in their own self worth, and need to group with others to protect themself. Some1 that is not insecure, knows that if he does a good job, and creates profit for the company, his boss will see this and pay him more than others. This person understands that some people do not have the drive that he does, and do not create as much value as he does. The last thing this person wants is to be grouped with inferior workers. In the end, when a company is unionized, the only people that benefits are the people in those unions. The business owners loses out, the consumer loses out, and most importantly, all the other workers that supply products to that business lose out. The workers in other businesses lose out because their pay will be cut to make up for the losses that union will force to happen.

[Medhue Simoni]

It is a broken record, as what you say is continuously propagated by the mass media, by governments, and by socialists, in exactly the same terms. Again, these theories have no evidence to back them up, only emotion driven propaganda. I've heard it all a million times, hence it's a broken record.

It is not impossible. It happens every single day in every part of your life, outside of those things touched by governments. It also is proven here in SL, which was my main point. You are making assumptions about human nature. These are not proven in any way, shape or form. Actually, to some1 thinking long term, which most people do, it is illogical to screw over your fellow man. Like bad karma, it can not benefit you in the long run. It can only benefit you if you have the protection of governments and their tools to manipulate the masses. In a completely free market, more often than not, all exchanges happen for the benefit of both parties. If this were not true, then the exchange would never happen. There are occassions when 1 party is not as knowledgable as the other, or 1 party tricks the other, and 1 person will lose out. In this case, the 1 that engages in this practice will, over time, lose customers as more and more customers get screwed and pass on their experiences to others.

[Solar Legion]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

It is a broken record, as what you say is continuously propagated by the mass media, by governments, and by socialists, in exactly the same terms. Again, these theories have not evidence to back them up, only emotion driven propaganda. I've heard it all a million times, hence it's a broken record.

It is not impossible. You are making assumptions about human nature. These are not proven in any way, shape or form. Actually, to some1 thinking long term, which most people do, it is illogical to screw over your fellow man. Like bad karma, it can not benefit you in the long run. It can only benefit you if you have the protection of governments and their tools to manipulate the masses. In a completely free market, more often than not, all exchanges happen for the benefit of both parties. If this were not true, then the exchange would never happen. There are occassions when 1 party is not as knowledgable as the other, or 1 party tricks the other, and 1 person will lose out. In this case, the 1 that engages in this practice will, over time, lose customers as more and more customers get screwed and pass on their experiences to others.

---

Right, you've heard it all before ...

You want evidence to back up my assertion concerning human nature? I present to you ... the entirety of human history. A history filled with conflict, greed and showing both the best and worst of Humanity - and even that history is skewed to make some look as if they were "good" when in reality they were anything but.

In the future you may want to consider that any time anyone uses the term "propaganda" when forming an argument on any topic ... I just laugh and dismiss them from that point forward. I have no time for conspiracy theories, starry eyed idealism or naïveté in any argument or debate.

If you'd like to be intellectually honest ... you won't use such a term.

[Medhue Simoni]

You can choose to dismiss whatever you want. It will be at your own demise.

Thanks for tossing up the lemon of history, as it is quite easy to hit this 1 out of the park. History does not have large examples of Free Markets. The closest thing to large Free Markets in history, would be 2 of the most successful empires the world has ever seen. Those would be the Roman empire and the USA. In both situations, they started out with mostly Free Markets. Over time, both empires got more and more socialist. At the time of the Roman Empires collapse, they were an extreme example of the corruptions of socialism. The same thing is happening here in the States, and as we creep closer and closer to total socialism, we can see better and better the collapse coming.

The only thing that can save the world, has nothing to do with forcing any1 to do anything, which always leads to wars and death. The free exchange between people, which is the concept of Free Markets, without any top down coersion, is the only way to save the world from the tyrants that think they can control the masses.

[Solar Legion]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

You can choose to dismiss whatever you want. It will be at your own demise.

Thanks for tossing up the lemon of history, as it is quite easy to hit this 1 out of the park. History does not have large examples of Free Markets. The closest thing to large Free Markets in history, would be 2 of the most successful empires the world has ever seen. Those would be the Roman empire and the USA. In both situations, they started out with mostly Free Markets. Over time, both empires got more and more socialist. At the time of the Roman Empires collapse, they were an extreme example of the corruptions of socialism. The same thing is happening here in the States, and as we creep closer and closer to total socialism, we can see better and better the collapse coming.

The only thing that can save the world, has nothing to do with forcing any1 to do anything, which always leads to wars and death. The free exchange between people, which is the concept of Free Markets, without any top down coersion, is the only way to save the world from the tyrants that think they can control the masses.

---

Hmm, and you use the same tactic I have always seen in those whose starry eyed idealism blind them to everything else: Any time someone brings human history into the equation where it concerns human nature, you try to bat it away with the lack of truly free markets for comparison in said history.

It doesn't work that way Med.

You want to "hit it out of the park"? You can do so by sticking to human nature and finding ways to prove that humans are "good" at their core. Going off on a tangent like you did just serves to weaken your position and enforces the notion that you're an idealist.

I don't like corporatins much myself, nor do I like the level of corruption within any government that is required to allow these corporations to have their way. I do not - however - delude myself into thinking that some mythical "free market" (which, as described can only exist in a perfect world) would solve these problems.

[Syo Emerald]

Free exchange? So you want an economy without money or what? That doesn't work for complex markets.