Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1121242Define "rich".

I'm going to say rich maybe starts at 4 million in assets (individual). That's enough to live comfortably indefinitely (assuming 2.5% dividends in blue-chip stock and reinvesting half of that, you then have 50K to play with and it would only go up every year)

But I don't see why anyone should be allowed to have more than a billion dollars.

It's all about extremes. You ask any reasonable person if spoons should be banned as a dangerous weapon, they would say no. If you ask them if people should be able to privately own ICBMs, they also say no. Everyone is somewhere in the middle. Should one person be allowed to own all the money on Earth? I feel like most people would say no. I draw my line at a billion.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1121247But I don't see why anyone should be allowed to have more than a billion dollars.

"Allowed"

How kind of you!

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1121242Define "rich".

Also...



Very well put.

Greetings!

Thank you, Alderaan Crumbs!

It always boggles me at how whiny, sniveling, and helpless so many people are nowadays. ?We are victims! Oh my god! Life is so unfair! Life is so hard! We can't succeed! We can only prosper if we have money taken from others, and given to us!"

It all sounds so pathetic, and weak. What happened to being self-reliant, strong, and independent? What happened with being driven, and working hard? Working harder and longer than you ever have before in your life? Sometimes we do need help. That's fine. What's wrong with asking other entrepreneurs, other business professionals, and just other people in the community? There's Patreon, and many *vehicles* online in which a person can start their own business. Kickstarter, donations, patronage. Whatever. Make it work, you know? There are local churches, local credit unions and banks, local businesses, local business groups, local veterans groups. I don't hear many people pursuing these things for help and support, nor do they talk about their own need to work smarter, work harder, work longer. Get tough. Stay focused, and dig. Dig, dig, dig.

Instead, it's "I'm helpless. I'm a victim! The only way is to take money from others, and give more power and control to the government."

NO. I say DIG! DIG! DIG! Chase success with passion, and all your strength!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: spon;1121196How to fix it? No idea. And I fear that no politician does either. Every time you try to put rules on capitalism you end up with disaster (communism), an unsustainable tax burden/expectation of services (European socialism) or corporate kleptocracy (the US in ~10-15 years). Even Japan is being rocked by corporate scandals these days. I'm not as hopeful as Melan that America will sort itself out. There are other countries out there who might become big enough to affect the US economy in bad ways. China already owns most of America's debt. If it saw an opportunity to help itself whilst harming the US, it might just take it.

As an onlooker, I am fairly optimistic about the USA's long-term outlook. It has a solid system which has been able to fix itself again and again. This self-correcting ability is what has allowed the country to defuse social unrest, and eventually bring the discontented on board. Of course, that always required actually doing the work on hand. There is no magic formula that will fix things without an effort, just a good framework and set of values.

I don't believe in China until it changes fundamentally (which it might, over a generation or two of peaceful development). Today, it is no longer the totalitarian hellhole it used to be, but it is still pretty damn bad. Without accountability, there are no safeguards stopping its leaders from driving it against the wall in pursuit of their personal power. They may be wise enough not to... but the risk is there, and Chairman Xi is extra suspect.

But this is veering mighty offtopic, so I will stop here.

Quote from: Altheus;1121244I acknowledge that work has no intrinsic value, and I'm really no kind of marxist, I just believe in the principle of a fair days' work for a fair days' pay. Of course, that relies on your definition of fair.

Fairness isn't real. Argo I find your argument based on nothing.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1121236I wasn't going to point out that the other extreme is children getting maimed in factories and sweatshops with suicide nets where the workers put in 12 hours a day 6 days a week. Yes, the government has to prevent things like that because "muh free market" doesn't. That's not the same thing as being a communist.

Historically children worked with their parents getting maimed and injured along the way. Avoiding child labor is a LUXURY. What you're essentially suggesting is forcing cultures to buy into luxuries they can't afford because they sound nice.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1121247I'm....maybe...I don't see...reasonable...I feel like most people... I draw my line

Notice the "I feels" "I thinks" and "I want" all emotional gut appeals.
The world starts at what you want and then has to go from there yes?

The reason I called you a commie is that communist "I feel, I want, I think, Reasonable"-isms killed millions. Its the same kind of warped logics. Starting at feelings and running from there.

In an attempt to bring the thread a little back towards topic, it's certainly true that in previous decades, some people (if not many) did work for game publishers and make a living wage at it; the rise in complaint volume seems to indicate that this is much harder or rarer now. Do people think this is actually true, or is it just a mistaken perspective -- people used to the desktop revolution don't properly understand the effort and ROI risk of the process, or people more used to communicating with designers directly in real time don't realize exactly how few economically successful designers and companies there always have been?  If it is true, what's changed?

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1121261The reason I called you a commie is that communist "I feel, I want, I think, Reasonable"-isms killed millions. Its the same kind of warped logics. Starting at feelings and running from there.

It's fine, people like you inspire actual communism in the youth by calling any sort of rules on the free market socialism. I can be aggressively moderate all day pissing off extreme conservatives and actual communist while the social pendulum waves back and forth until good sense wins out. Extremist don't change their opinion, they spout off different perspectives even when their view becomes unpopular, which is how the pendulum swings the other way.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1121262In an attempt to bring the thread a little back towards topic, it's certainly true that in previous decades, some people (if not many) did work for game publishers and make a living wage at it; the rise in complaint volume seems to indicate that this is much harder or rarer now. Do people think this is actually true, or is it just a mistaken perspective -- people used to the desktop revolution don't properly understand the effort and ROI risk of the process, or people more used to communicating with designers directly in real time don't realize exactly how few economically successful designers and companies there always have been?  If it is true, what's changed?

As far as I know, yes way less people work full time as RPG writers. I point to three possible reasons.

1. There are a ton of RPGs and many of these RPGs will never "go out of date" or be unavailable.

2. RPG players don't need to go to brick and mortar stores which means RPGs companies don't need to stock them. The barrier to entry is low and the ability to buy what you want is high.

3. The appetite for endless amounts of books for the same game has dried up which means a full-time RPG writer needs to be making brilliant new games all the time.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1121261Historically children worked with their parents getting maimed and injured along the way. Avoiding child labor is a LUXURY. What you're essentially suggesting is forcing cultures to buy into luxuries they can't afford because they sound nice.

Historically, slavery was legal. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1121273Historically, slavery was legal. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

If you look at the continuum, it is better then the alternative unless your motto is "Live Free or Die" I guess.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1121241Oh I don't need it to work. I just like the idea of this money getting freed up and spent. And it really doesn't hurt anyone you should take it from (though democrats will still go after the upper-poor because they are just as bought as everyone else). I like the idea of a wealth tax of 100% after a billion. No one needs a billion dollars and no one really earned a billion dollars (they took it). But they definitely don't nee more than a billion.

If you look at Government then I would agree.  They literally force you at threat of death or imprisonment to give them your money.  If you do not agree with me then try not paying your taxes and see how well that works out for you.

However if we look at business how exactly did someone like Jeff Bezos take a Billion dollars?  I mean he never forced me to give him money.  When I choose not to buy anything from Amazon no comes to my house with threats of what is going to happen to me if I dont send Jeff Bezos more money.
It just seems to me like a dumb talking point that everyone can hear and nod along with, 'no one earns a billion dollars', but no one ever really thinks about it.

If we want to introduce a "fairness model" of living then I suggest we should cap the number of sports titles and medals that our sports people can win.  I mean people like Michael Phelps dont earn 23 Gold Medals - they take them from other swimmers that have put in all that time and effort into their training for nothing.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1121273Historically, slavery was legal. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

To make it clear: I don't like people being slaves.
But the past is a different universe. I find judging the past based on the present to be very misguided. In the past, the alternative to slavery was mostly just death. You could say that slavery was very progressive at the time

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1121275To make it clear: I don't like people being slaves.
But the past is a different universe. I find judging the past based on the present to be very misguided. In the past, the alternative to slavery was mostly just death. You could say that slavery was very progressive at the time

I would agree. And I also think that child labor is no longer a necessary evil in the modernized west.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1121195I roll my eyes whenever, for example, people bitch about Amazon but watch Jack Ryan and then order stuff through Prime.

How dare you? Next you'll be disparaging those valiant protestors carrying their Starbucks and iPhones?

Quote from: spon;1121196Trump is one of the results of this discontent, but I don't see him doing anything to help the situation. I fear he'll just make it worse.  

Google Trump Opportunity Zones. You'll find it interesting. Hopefully the program expands as promised.
 
 

Quote from: spon;1121196People's expectations (in the 1950's - 1990s) were that tomorrow will be better than yesterday. Since then, in the developed world a least,  things have slowly seemed to get worse.

"A Better Tomorrow" was always a horrible lie. It poisoned our society and made people believe they were entitled to never-ending good days. It's a sick mentality that rots the soul because it has ZERO reality in the history of the world. What we do know for sure is "Life is Uncertain" and "Shit Happens." We can (and should) strive to make tomorrow better, but we must always be prepared to deal with the roughness of Reality.

Because Reality is a ruthless and hideous muthafucker.

Quote from: spon;1121196Yes, you can have your shiny new iPhone or smart TV or Nikes, but you can't afford a house, or health insurance or a decent job that won't get outsourced in the next 10 years.

My mom's friends are Vietnamese boat people who became janitors. They own their homes in the Bay Area and put their kids through college. Now their two doctor kids send their parents on luxury vacations and force them to drive a Mercedes. Yes, force them. It was pretty funny.

Quote from: spon;1121196China already owns most of America's debt. If it saw an opportunity to help itself whilst harming the US, it might just take it.

When you owe the bank a million dollars, the bank owns you.
But when you owe the bank a billion dollars, you own the bank.

The USA could default on its debt and China knows it.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1121209Again this is why I fear commies. Such compassion.
"I would rather everybody starve equally then somebody be paid more".

If we stay free, it will be because the 2nd Amendment backs up the 1st.  

Quote from: Brad;1121219Explain Andrew Carnegie.

Daddy Carnegie loved Mommy Carnegie very much and they had Baby Andrew!

Quote from: Rhedyn;1121226Minimum wage laws are a bad compromise but I doubt people are actually ready to severely tax wealth and redistribute it as Universal Basic Income.

60M patriots with 400M guns and 50B rounds says communism ain't coming to the USA.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1121242Define "rich".

Anyone with more money than me!!!

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1121275You could say that slavery was very progressive at the time

There's an anthropology theory that agriculture brought forth slavery.

Because before agriculture, captured foes were eaten. Nom nom.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1121262In an attempt to bring the thread a little back towards topic, it's certainly true that in previous decades, some people (if not many) did work for game publishers and make a living wage at it; the rise in complaint volume seems to indicate that this is much harder or rarer now. Do people think this is actually true, or is it just a mistaken perspective -- people used to the desktop revolution don't properly understand the effort and ROI risk of the process, or people more used to communicating with designers directly in real time don't realize exactly how few economically successful designers and companies there always have been?  If it is true, what's changed?

It's ALWAYS hard to make a living selling non-essential products!

Non-essentials are paid for with disposable income. AKA, the smallest part of everyone's income.

As leisure time increased, the options for our leisure activities have radically increased. Take a moment and imagine how many things you could do on your next day off with $100 burning in your pocket. Any mid-size town offers dozens of restaurants, movie theaters, concerts, luxury good stores, sex shops, bars, nightclubs, and the list goes on and on. All competing for your disposable income. Or you could stay home order food delivery, buy crap online and binge on downloaded entertainment. So today the brick and mortar must compete with the digital so even more competition for that $100 in your pocket.

I have friends who are "successful" game designers. AKA, its their day job. They work very hard because according to them, FIVE new games come out every day...yeah, over 2000 new games each year. It's insane. And every designer has to find a way to get on top of that pile to maximize their sales.

Unless I was independently wealthy, I'd never go into any hobby business full time because you heavily risk turning your favorite fun hobby into work and misery. Selling game stuff might be fun gig for beer money, but I wouldn't want my next meal dependent on a RPG.

So it's, "My pronouns are 'Boss and Sir'. STFU and get my coffee."

These people and their adjacent entitlement is insane. Doing it their way, everyone EXCEPT white males profit, regardless of work ethic.

They have zero understanding of or tolerance for Capitalism. It's like they grew up in a Disney film.

Which is the problem.

Quote from: Brad;1121249"Allowed"

How kind of you!

Yeah, people with that mindset wonder why so many who love freedom also love guns...

To be fair, I did ask and while I VEHEMENTLY disagree, that’s their opinion. It’s when such ideas are acted upon that I begin to think less civilly.