Economy and gold.. update needed

[The Zog historian]

The way i see it your example still have cause and effect

If you pick up a rock and trow it at your friend he will try to avoid it if you do the same thing but this time you change your mind in the last second and not trow the rock 9 times of 10 you will get a similar effect
This show me that the intent of trowing the rock is cause

In uo we see this kind of cause in auctions (even if a person do not win he still alter the price)

Your example of a rock does not apply here. It's no more meaningful than arguing that one plus one equals two. The simple point that you are unnecessarily overcomplicating is that in UO and the real world alike, the cause of higher prices is the ever-increasing availability of money. We've seen UO gold increase continually since day one, for a variety of reasons. People hunt monsters, they sell to NPCs, and they dupe.

The bank printing money was maybe a bad example

Yes, it was on your end.

Storing money under your bed perhaps better illustrate that money that is not in use can not creat any kind of effect unless you use that money as a form of pressure

In uo everybody store money under the bed at some point

In the real world, few people do that. Money is recirculated when people save it in one form or another, like in a bank or buying investment instruments.

In UO, people can sit on gold, but like in real life, they don't acquire money unless they want to do something with it.

But in either situation, though very few will knows how much money is sitting out there, it's when people purchase items that we get an idea of the items' worth. Prices are a discovery process, and money is simply the means by which everyone can see what a particular item is worth to a particular person.

I use EM items as an example because it is a likely candidate of a delayed effect from years of inflation but EM items can never be the source of Inflation

You're backtracking now. You previously said:

"THis is all true but the effect when the money that they spend to buy (EM items) hit the market is still the same"

I try to explain that even if EM items is not the source of inflation you can still put some blame at them for our gold situation See my reply in post 113

And now you're contradicting yourself in the following paragraph. It's not EM items, or any items at all.

I did not write down any notes of the prices these last 3 years I do not have a time machine There is no way i can prove any of that
Realy no reply i can write to that other than OOPS
I do remember the price on some items but i could remember wrong so that is no proof

I'm not asking you to "prove" anything. I am, however, asking you to account for other factors you dismiss. A good economist not only considers what is seen, but what is not seen.

To anyone familiar with economics knows where that statement comes from, my perspective becomes obvious.[/quote][/quote]

 

[claudia-fjp]

ahhh... the truth hurts yes..ears burning etc etc etc...and please no trash talk ....high school understanding my arse......your not in 'general chat' now...save it for then ..ok

That wasn't trash talk. That was an observation. You don't have a basic grasp of economics. Your posts point to the fact you have never completed an Econ 101 course. A lot of people in the world haven't, but most of them don't post on the topic like they know what they are talking about.

 

[THP]

You babbled a lot, but you still did not explain how the mere introduction of an item causes inflation. Your steps 2 through 13 are exactly what I have pointed out, what Uvtha is also pointing out: any and all inflation is caused only by the creation of new money. Whether it's duping or someone farming for gold (or selling items to NPCs in the old days), the creation of the item itself does nothing by itself. The same reason a diamond selling for $30 million, or a 787 selling for $140 million, without causing inflation, is the same reason a new EM item also doesn't cause inflation. There is inflation only when the money supply increases. Think I have explained that well enough for you?

And while I don't deny the existence of duping, if it were really so easy, then the market would be flooded with everything.

LOL u babble on well too with little or no meaning ...alas iam quite clear in my explanation that billy no mates and sally no mates want the shiny EM items..al of them and they simply have not got the gold to keep up with them.... so will dupe gold /or dupe items this increasing the amount of gold into the game...jesus.....its not rocket science....

 

[Herman]

Your example of a rock does not apply here. It's no more meaningful than arguing that one plus one equals two. The simple point that you are unnecessarily overcomplicating is that in UO and the real world alike, the cause of higher prices is the ever-increasing availability of money. We've seen UO gold increase continually since day one, for a variety of reasons. People hunt monsters, they sell to NPCs, and they dupe.



Yes, it was on your end.



In the real world, few people do that. Money is recirculated when people save it in one form or another, like in a bank or buying investment instruments.

In UO, people can sit on gold, but like in real life, they don't acquire money unless they want to do something with it.

But in either situation, though very few will knows how much money is sitting out there, it's when people purchase items that we get an idea of the items' worth. Prices are a discovery process, and money is simply the means by which everyone can see what a particular item is worth to a particular person.



You're backtracking now. You previously said:

"THis is all true but the effect when the money that they spend to buy (EM items) hit the market is still the same"



And now you're contradicting yourself in the following paragraph. It's not EM items, or any items at all.



I'm not asking you to "prove" anything. I am, however, asking you to account for other factors you dismiss. A good economist not only considers what is seen, but what is not seen.

To anyone familiar with economics knows where that statement comes from, my perspective becomes obvious.

[/quote][/quote]

I may explain my line of thought bad (English is not my main language)
But
To pick lines of text out of context and claim i contradict myself is just silly it is no better than to pick on my spelling
You need to read both the post I reply to and my reply

The only thing you are correct about is that it is very rare that money goes outside the sytem in real life but it can happen and if you go back in time ex 200 years it was much more common
In uo this could be very common big reason for this is that pixel gold does not have a real value to the average player

My cause effect example is not pointless it explain that cause does not have to be a physical thing
I even left you a bone in that example it was not my intent to make an error but i did
Second time i read my post i spotted it but decided not to edit it because i wanted to see if u even bother to read my post

 

[Herman]

Your example of a rock does not apply here. It's no more meaningful than arguing that one plus one equals two. The simple point that you are unnecessarily overcomplicating is that in UO and the real world alike, the cause of higher prices is the ever-increasing availability of money. We've seen UO gold increase continually since day one, for a variety of reasons. People hunt monsters, they sell to NPCs, and they dupe.
s.

[/quote][/quote]


We both know what the source is for inflation

What you do not want to understand is that an ever so growing money bag that is never used in ex 4 years will cause a delayed effect on the market when it after 4 years get spent
And all I say that it is possible that this event took place in uo after event items got so wanted

 

[The Zog historian]

LOL u babble on well too with little or no meaning ...alas iam quite clear in my explanation that billy no mates and sally no mates want the shiny EM items..al of them and they simply have not got the gold to keep up with them.... so will dupe gold /or dupe items this increasing the amount of gold into the game...jesus.....its not rocket science....

You're as clear as mud, and failing, in explaining how the mere introduction of an item causes inflation. One more time: it does not. What causes inflation is not the item, but an increase in the money supply. This holds true for the real world and virtual ones.

Nor is duping as common as you think. It happens, without a doubt, but not to where if someone wants 1 billion gold, he'll just dupe it. Otherwise we'd be paying such high amounts for just one jar of PoF. That is not "rocket science."

 

[Uvtha]

LOL u babble on well too with little or no meaning ...alas iam quite clear in my explanation that billy no mates and sally no mates want the shiny EM items..al of them and they simply have not got the gold to keep up with them.... so will dupe gold /or dupe items this increasing the amount of gold into the game...jesus.....its not rocket science....

We get what you are saying, we just disagree.

 

[The Zog historian]

[/quote]

I may explain my line of thought bad (English is not my main language)[/quote]

No problem with that. You write more coherently than some UHall posters who supposedly are native English speakers.

But
To pick lines of text out of context and claim i contradict myself is just silly it is no better than to pick on my spelling
You need to read both the post I reply to and my reply

I did read your reply, and I didn't pick anything out of context. I quoted your very words. In one sentence you said introducing a new item doesn't cause inflation. In the next sentence you said it did. Which is it?

Don't think I'm trying to flame you or come down hard. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency in your argument, while giving a basic lesson in economics.

The only thing you are correct about is that it is very rare that money goes outside the sytem in real life but it can happen and if you go back in time ex 200 years it was much more common
In uo this could be very common big reason for this is that pixel gold does not have a real value to the average player

If money truly goes outside of an economic system, it's only temporary. It will always come back. Even if someone hides money underneath a bed, it's with the goal to spend the money in the future.

In UO, the reason that gold doesn't have as much value is simple: there's so much of it. There's a lot of gold already, and it's easy to get more.

My cause effect example is not pointless it explain that cause does not have to be a physical thing
I even left you a bone in that example it was not my intent to make an error but i did
Second time i read my post i spotted it but decided not to edit it because i wanted to see if u even bother to read my post

I most certainly read your post, and whatever point you were trying to make, it was only to state a truism. It did not validate your perspective.

You wrote before:

If you pick up a rock and trow it at your friend he will try to avoid it if you do the same thing but this time you change your mind in the last second and not trow the rock 9 times of 10 you will get a similar effect
This show me that the intent of trowing the rock is cause​

So let me ask plainly: what were you trying to say there?

We both know what the source is for inflation

Are you sure? Because you're going back and forth between a new item causes inflation and a new item doesn't cause inflation.

What you do not want to understand is that an ever so growing money bag that is never used in ex 4 years will cause a delayed effect on the market when it after 4 years get spent
And all I say that it is possible that this event took place in uo after event items got so wanted

When the effect happens is not the point. The point is that a new item does not by itself cause inflation.

If I buy a spined runic kit today for 100K, does it matter if I made the gold today or in 1997? No, it only matters that I have the gold today. If a commodities trader is buying barrels of oil for a client, it doesn't matter if the money came from last year's profits, a family's old money, or new money that a central bank just loaned a bank that loaned the money to the family.

 

[Herman]

You wrote before:

If you pick up a rock and trow it at your friend he will try to avoid it if you do the same thing but this time you change your mind in the last second and not trow the rock 9 times of 10 you will get a similar effect
This show me that the intent of trowing the rock is cause​

So let me ask plainly: what were you trying to say there?

.[/quote]

Cause and effect is very basic and a very important if you like to understand why things happen
In economics I would say it is a must to understand
Many think they know what cause and effect is because it sound so simple and it can be very simple but sometimes it can be confusing I manage to write my example wrong and i made up that example

My example was a direct reply to your example that the market can change just because people expect it will

I said in the other post i left an error in my example i better edit that now so i do not confuse people
The error is
If intent alone is enough to cause an effect then only thinking about trowing the rock will cause your friend to try to avoid it
In my example intent is not the cause
The cause is your friends expectation that you are going to trow the rock

I try to explain this because I believe money alone can never be a cause and since you always need a cause for things to happen it have got to be something else

So the simple explanation for a cause is money that are in use
Now the rock example was a way for me to explain that simply expecting a change in the market can be a cause like in your example
And another way of looking at it is you can take the money out of the picture and still get an effect on the market if i can convince alot of people that i have a billion gold pices even if I have non
And I will spend it all on ethy lamas
it is a fair guess the prices on ethy lamas will go up even if I do not buy any

So if money alone is not a cause then money alone can not creat inflation

 

[Herman]

If money truly goes outside of an economic system, it's only temporary. It will always come back. Even if someone hides money underneath a bed, it's with the goal to spend the money in the future.

.[/quote]

Are you starting to agree with me because money that temporary is outside the system is what i have tryed to explain to you all this time

but you can not say that money always come back because nothing prevents it from getting lost just because it use to happen that way does not mean it have to happen that way why do you think we speak about gold sinks so often in uo


So if it is possible to have money that is outside the system and you can put that money back in that is proof for my idea that EM items can force the prices to go up very fast if there was alot of money outside the system used for these items

Do you see now why it is so important for this idea to work that money is not the cause for inflation money in use is the cause

Reason if money was the cause you can only delete money never put money that was outside the system back in
But if money in use is the cause then you can temporary put money outside the system then put it back in

 

[Herman]

And zog can you plz start to read and answer my posts as a unit when you chop my post up like that and answer them pice by pice you loose any context that post might have had
and this also explain to me why you think i contradict myself when all i try to do is explain the same thing different

 

[The Zog historian]

For this dialectic style, I reply piece by piece. I have not taken anything you said out of context, nor have I misrepresented anything you said.

I have, however, pointed out that in one statement you said that the creation of a new item does not cause inflation, then in the next statement you said but items can cause inflation. You still do not explain that. I would like you to be consistent if we are to have a dialogue.

Cause and effect is very basic and a very important if you like to understand why things happen
In economics I would say it is a must to understand
Many think they know what cause and effect is because it sound so simple and it can be very simple but sometimes it can be confusing I manage to write my example wrong and i made up that example

You're only stating a truism. The "cause" of inflation is an increase in the money supply. That is all.

I still do not understand the point of your example. It's something obvious but does not validate your unfortunately erroneous view on what causes inflation.

My example was a direct reply to your example that the market can change just because people expect it will

I said in the other post i left an error in my example i better edit that now so i do not confuse people
The error is
If intent alone is enough to cause an effect then only thinking about trowing the rock will cause your friend to try to avoid it
In my example intent is not the cause
The cause is your friends expectation that you are going to trow the rock

I try to explain this because I believe money alone can never be a cause and since you always need a cause for things to happen it have got to be something else

Your argument is circular. You are not proving anything, you realize. You are only saying that because you do not believe something is true, then it must be something else, yet you are not providing any evidence to support your claim.

Nowhere have I talked about "intent," because it is a certain thing that new money will always be spent at some point. People find new money, whether they dig gold out of the ground or central banks create new money, or farm monsters in UO, implicitly because people want to spend the money. They want to spend it either now or sometime in the future.

But to use your example of "intent," let's say I have a vendor where I sell Powder of Fortifying for 1 million gold. There is someone every day who buys one jar, reason unknown. If he does it nine days in a row, then on day 10 I will make sure there is at least one jar for 1 million gold. His actions tell me that he has a lot of gold, and from that I can deduce inflation. Does it matter if the 1 million gold is from 1998 or 2008 or 2013?

I have given you several examples of how inflation works in the real world. Remember again my example of the diamond that sold in Hong Kong. It did not create $30 million of inflation. It sold for $30 million because someone already had that much money.

The same thing works in UO. If someone buys a blaze cu sidhe for 1 billion gold, it is because the person already had 1 billion gold to spend. It did not create inflation.

So the simple explanation for a cause is money that are in use
Now the rock example was a way for me to explain that simply expecting a change in the market can be a cause like in your example
And another way of looking at it is you can take the money out of the picture and still get an effect on the market if i can convince alot of people that i have a billion gold pices even if I have non
And I will spend it all on ethy lamas
it is a fair guess the prices on ethy lamas will go up even if I do not buy any

So if money alone is not a cause then money alone can not creat inflation

You are arguing your way in a circle. When you talk about "money," remember that intent does not matter. The mere existence of new money is the only cause of inflation. We discover that there is new money because someone is bidding up the price.

In your example of ethereal llamas, it collapses once people realize you do not have the 1 billion gold. If you place a very high bid, the seller will wait for you to hand over the money. People do not go by "John Q is offering 1 billion gold on Atlantic." They go by "John Q paid 1 billion gold on Atlantic." On auction sites like eBay, once in a while there are fake bids. It may temporarily drive up the price of auctions happening at the same time, but prices will later settle back down.

In the real world, an investor might try to place an order for $1 billion worth of a company's stock, driving up the price, and by settlement day it is discovered that he doesn't have the money. This is difficult to do. Broker-dealers have safeguards to prevent things like this, even with well-known clients of strong reputation. Moreover, the "buyer" would be charged with securities fraud, while any "scalpers" -- those selling the stock for a quick profit -- would be investigated as accomplices.

One more time: "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output." - Milton Friedman

 

[The Zog historian]

Are you starting to agree with me because money that temporary is outside the system is what i have tryed to explain to you all this time

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. If money is not circulating in the economy, it is still irrelevant. People discover that there is inflation because others are able to bid continually higher and higher prices.

but you can not say that money always come back because nothing prevents it from getting lost just because it use to happen that way does not mean it have to happen that way why do you think we speak about gold sinks so often in uo

Gold sinks in UO have never had enough effect to keep the money supply from growing quickly. There's been little incentive for players to put all their money in hair dye, city titles, and so on.

In the real world, any money that is "lost" is insignificant in the impact on prices. If $10,000 burns in a house fire, it is of negligible effect. It could be $1 billion and still have little impact.

So if it is possible to have money that is outside the system and you can put that money back in that is proof for my idea that EM items can force the prices to go up very fast if there was alot of money outside the system used for these items

But the money was already there.

If someone bought a diamond for $30 million, it does not matter if the money was cash that was underneath the mattress, if the money was in a bank account, or if the money was stolen from a bank. The price of the diamond was still because someone had the money to pay for it.

Do you see now why it is so important for this idea to work that money is not the cause for inflation money in use is the cause

Reason if money was the cause you can only delete money never put money that was outside the system back in
But if money in use is the cause then you can temporary put money outside the system then put it back in

You're making a distinction that does not exist. The entire purpose of money's existence is for it to be spent, now or in the future.

 

[The Zog historian]

And zog can you plz start to read and answer my posts as a unit when you chop my post up like that and answer them pice by pice you loose any context that post might have had
and this also explain to me why you think i contradict myself when all i try to do is explain the same thing different

You said:

"I use EM items as an example because it is a likely candidate of a delayed effect from years of inflation but EM items can never be the source of Inflation"

You said right there that EM items don't cause inflation. Or is that not what you meant?

Then you said:

"THis is all true but the effect when the money that they spend to buy (EM items) hit the market is still the same"

Thus you contradicted yourself. I'm not flaming you, just pointing out that your arguments are inconsistent.

 

[Uvtha]

And zog can you plz start to read and answer my posts as a unit when you chop my post up like that and answer them pice by pice you loose any context that post might have had
and this also explain to me why you think i contradict myself when all i try to do is explain the same thing different

Forget about it Herman. It's stratics town.

 

[Herman]

You said:

"I use EM items as an example because it is a likely candidate of a delayed effect from years of inflation but EM items can never be the source of Inflation"

You said right there that EM items don't cause inflation. Or is that not what you meant?

Then you said:

"THis is all true but the effect when the money that they spend to buy (EM items) hit the market is still the same"

Thus you contradicted yourself. I'm not flaming you, just pointing out that your arguments are inconsistent.

Then you do not understand what i say
Money is the source
Money in use is the cause but this is a too simple way of saying this I know that now it always was the expectation of the seller that was the cause that drive prices up

Source and cause is not the same thing

And if you did understand my intent with post 159 you would understand that all i try to do is prove that the last line of text is true
And if that last line in 159 is true then post 160 is true by default

To show why your style to chop up my post is a realy bad way of arguing

If my theory is 1x3 = 3

your answer would be

1 is the second smalest single digit number
X is repeated addition
3 is the fourth smalest singel digit number
= the sum on both sides have to be the same
3 now you are repeating yourself

All true but very silly

 

[Herman]

Forget about it Herman. It's stratics town.

I know i should
I hope some usefull information can be picked out of this thread even after zog and I destroyed it

Sry for that

 

[Lord Frodo]

Trying to listen to you guys go back and forth is funny. There is no model in the real world that is anything like UO. There was and I think it was Brazil that printed so much money that their dollars became worthless. In the real world old money is removed from the market and in UO it stays. UO needs to come up with real gold sinks if it ever wants to get the old gold out of the market, that and only that will curb rising gold costs. As long as players know that there is a boat load of gold in the game they will charge others a boat load of gold for their goods. I use the term goods as anything that can and will be sold in UO. There are only 2 real gold sinks in UO and nobody uses them, the Community Collection System (15 gold per point) and the Clean-up point System (100 gold per point). Cutting off a zero on peoples gold will NOT fix the problem and just might piss enough people off to kill UO. There are far to many ways for gold to come into UO (MOBS and NPCs) and no real way for gold to leave the system. Insurance and vendor cost is just a small leak in the bucket when the tap is turned on all the way and the bucket grows larger every day to hold it all. Come up with real gold sinks that people will use and you might, i say might, see that bucket shrink.

Some things right now that may help.

1. NPCs no longer buy goods and their prices stay the same.
2. House customization, right now UO gives you back everything you put in. UO should only give back the cost of the land and nothing more. You want walls, floor and a roof then you pay for it, no refund. Find a way to customize Castles and Keeps and I do not mean Borg Cubes either. Yes I would pay for this just to be able to remove/move some walls, floors and stairs. If you remove all stairs then you will need to buy tiles to move from floor to floor. No outside walls may be moved but charge a fee to change type of stone used maybe 3-4 types only. Big fee to remove trees or anything else that may be inside the foundation area and will return when the house is removed/resized.
3. Deco that the players will buy that only costs an arm, not an arm and a leg.
4. Drop the gold/point ratio on the Collection Systems to reflect the UO World value.
5. Whole house rental boxes for house resizing.
6. Moving boxes that you pack to take to another house.
7. Moving Van that UO packs and unpacks when you move to a new house. I would have paid a good amount of gold for UO to do this when I moved from one castle to another. 3 days packing and moving and I am still, 2 weeks later, trying to put everything back the way it was. {The 2 moving boxes are one use only at a price per max house storage, so a 7x7 would cost less than a 31x31. This is just an example: 7x7 cost 780K and a 31x31 would cost 7.5M just to move. I used 1000 gold x max storage. Maybe double or triple for the Van.}
8. House storage container that does not count against your house count. Not sure of the cost for this.
9. House rental. Not sure about price/types/size. Auto rent pay 1/3/6 mo just like your account but not with the 90 day free like with housing. Maybe 1 per shard and limit the size. Account must remain active to keep this. Maybe a 5 day IDOC timer. Gold taken from bank of owner.

 

[Herman]

If you thought it was funny then some good came out of it

I can say i lerned from this experience that trying to explain something in a too simple manner can cause greater confusion

 

[old gypsy]

Maybe we should let this go for a while... give the Devs recovery time from the migraines they may have by now.

On the other hand, they could just be shaking their heads and chuckling...

 

[Uvtha]

I know i should
I hope some usefull information can be picked out of this thread even after zog and I destroyed it

Sry for that

No worries. You are not his first thread derailing partner. I've been foolish enough to fall into that trap myself.

 

[Lady CaT]

Maybe we should let this go for a while... give the Devs recovery time from the migraines they may have by now.

On the other hand, they could just be shaking their heads and chuckling...

Or hopefully the developers are home with their families for the holidays and spared all these silly forum topics.

 

[The Zog historian]

Then you do not understand what i say
Money is the source
Money in use is the cause but this is a too simple way of saying this I know that now it always was the expectation of the seller that was the cause that drive prices up

Source and cause is not the same thing

I understand perfectly well what you are saying. In the English idiom, now you are splitting hairs.

I have never even said "money" is the cause. It is the creation of new money that is the cause of inflation, whether in UO or the real world. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And if you did understand my intent with post 159 you would understand that all i try to do is prove that the last line of text is true
And if that last line in 159 is true then post 160 is true by default

You're still engaging in circular logic. You are not providing any proof for your argument at all.

To show why your style to chop up my post is a realy bad way of arguing

Why, because you said one thing, then said something opposite in the very next paragraph?

It is not my fault that you contradicted yourself, or that I have laid out examples of why you're wrong, and you cannot address them.

If you cannot deal with the fact that I pick your arguments apart, and show that you are inconsistent, then you need to evaluate what you are saying.

If my theory is 1x3 = 3

your answer would be

1 is the second smalest single digit number
X is repeated addition
3 is the fourth smalest singel digit number
= the sum on both sides have to be the same
3 now you are repeating yourself

All true but very silly

Here's some friendly advice, mein herr: don't you dare put words in my mouth. I've never said anything of the kind. You keep stating truism after truism, claiming them as some sort of "proof" when they lend nothing to your side.

I have attempted to engage you in friendly dialogue so you'd learn a thing or two, because I took you as someone sensible, and I gave you the benefit of the doubt with the language barrier. If you want to pursue the nonsense you just stated, then it will be entirely your fault when this thread becomes unpleasant.

 

[The Zog historian]

Trying to listen to you guys go back and forth is funny. There is no model in the real world that is anything like UO. There was and I think it was Brazil that printed so much money that their dollars became worthless.

There's nothing "funny" about it that I see. The fellow can't understand that the reason there's inflation in the real world is just as applicable to UO: the creation of new money (vis-à-vis demand if we're to be more specific).

Brazil is only one of many countries that has had hyperinflation. The most notorious historical example is Weimar Germany. In more recent years it was Zimbabwe. Venezuela's inflation is officially the highest of all countries at present, now exceeding 50% annually. The place is headed for disaster as Maduro follows in Chavez's footsteps, blaming "capitalism" when it's the same old thing: a central bank continually printing money to pay off the military and others supporters. Not many Americans are aware, let alone bother to consider, that of the hundreds of billions borrowed annually by the federal government, nearly all of it now is monetized by the Federal Reserve.

In UO, gold is farmed from monsters or earned from NPCs (I've made several million just for a few seconds of scooping up invasion gems after each captain), and sometimes gold is duped. It's been never-ending since the first day, and in any case it's the only way such a virtual world can get started (and the only way new players in a virtual world can get started).

In the real world old money is removed from the market

Not knowing exactly what you mean, I'll take your statement in and of itself. This is rare in the modern world. A central bank can sell government bonds to soak up money, reducing the monetary supply. On net, this isn't happening as the world's major central banks keep printing money so that governments can deficit-spend their way out of crises.

Even when Spanish galleons would sink now and then, the lost gold hadn't yet hit the Old World's economy, so there was no removal of money. Egypt's pharaohs of old were

Every so often, a modern economy will see a central bank drastically cut the money supply itself, like from 1929-1933 when the Federal Reserve cut M1 by a fourth and M2 by nearly a third. Since then, the usual practice isn't to cut the money supply itself, but to cut the growth in the money supply. At Reagan's direction, Volcker cut growth dramatically. There were some "cuts" but those were offset by other increases.

Are you referring to someone putting money under a mattress, taking it out of circulation? This is insignificant compared to the total money supply. The money has already been created. Besides, as I have explained, the discovery process of inflation is when people act on the money. The money's already there, and it's going to be spent someday, unless these insignificant amounts are somehow destroyed.

So when you made that statement, I really don't know what you could be referring to.

and in UO it stays. UO needs to come up with real gold sinks if it ever wants to get the old gold out of the market, that and only that will curb rising gold costs. As long as players know that there is a boat load of gold in the game they will charge others a boat load of gold for their goods. I use the term goods as anything that can and will be sold in UO. There are only 2 real gold sinks in UO and nobody uses them, the Community Collection System (15 gold per point) and the Clean-up point System (100 gold per point). Cutting off a zero on peoples gold will NOT fix the problem and just might piss enough people off to kill UO. There are far to many ways for gold to come into UO (MOBS and NPCs) and no real way for gold to leave the system. Insurance and vendor cost is just a small leak in the bucket when the tap is turned on all the way and the bucket grows larger every day to hold it all. Come up with real gold sinks that people will use and you might, i say might, see that bucket shrink.

Indeed, and we've made a lot of proposals over the years as to what we'd like to see.

Some things right now that may help.

1. NPCs no longer buy goods and their prices stay the same.
2. House customization, right now UO gives you back everything you put in. UO should only give back the cost of the land and nothing more. You want walls, floor and a roof then you pay for it, no refund. Find a way to customize Castles and Keeps and I do not mean Borg Cubes either. Yes I would pay for this just to be able to remove/move some walls, floors and stairs. If you remove all stairs then you will need to buy tiles to move from floor to floor. No outside walls may be moved but charge a fee to change type of stone used maybe 3-4 types only. Big fee to remove trees or anything else that may be inside the foundation area and will return when the house is removed/resized.
3. Deco that the players will buy that only costs an arm, not an arm and a leg.
4. Drop the gold/point ratio on the Collection Systems to reflect the UO World value.
5. Whole house rental boxes for house resizing.
6. Moving boxes that you pack to take to another house.
7. Moving Van that UO packs and unpacks when you move to a new house. I would have paid a good amount of gold for UO to do this when I moved from one castle to another. 3 days packing and moving and I am still, 2 weeks later, trying to put everything back the way it was. {The 2 moving boxes are one use only at a price per max house storage, so a 7x7 would cost less than a 31x31. This is just an example: 7x7 cost 780K and a 31x31 would cost 7.5M just to move. I used 1000 gold x max storage. Maybe double or triple for the Van.}
8. House storage container that does not count against your house count. Not sure of the cost for this.
9. House rental. Not sure about price/types/size. Auto rent pay 1/3/6 mo just like your account but not with the 90 day free like with housing. Maybe 1 per shard and limit the size. Account must remain active to keep this. Maybe a 5 day IDOC timer. Gold taken from bank of owner.[/quote]

1. I don't know that there are enough newer players to be affected by this.
2. I can go for this. The Devs have said that there's no house customization, and I suspect it's more a matter of nobody remaining who knows how that code works.
3. By all means, things that absorb gold but are good values.
4. Actually, this would mean more and more gold per point, because of the ever-growing amount of gold.
5. 8. 9. I think the Devs would rather have inflation they don't have to worry about (it's purely a player concern) than do something to hurt subscription revenue.
6. 7. This could work too, but do the Devs have enough time? This would take away from their work on whatever new projects they're working on.

 

[The Zog historian]

No worries. You are not his first thread derailing partner. I've been foolish enough to fall into that trap myself.

Just don't say anything self-contradictory (or patently untrue) when I'm around. Easy.

 

[virtualhabitat]

Some things right now that may help.

1. NPCs no longer buy goods and their prices stay the same.
2. House customization, right now UO gives you back everything you put in. UO should only give back the cost of the land and nothing more. You want walls, floor and a roof then you pay for it, no refund. Find a way to customize Castles and Keeps and I do not mean Borg Cubes either. Yes I would pay for this just to be able to remove/move some walls, floors and stairs. If you remove all stairs then you will need to buy tiles to move from floor to floor. No outside walls may be moved but charge a fee to change type of stone used maybe 3-4 types only. Big fee to remove trees or anything else that may be inside the foundation area and will return when the house is removed/resized.
3. Deco that the players will buy that only costs an arm, not an arm and a leg.
4. Drop the gold/point ratio on the Collection Systems to reflect the UO World value.
5. Whole house rental boxes for house resizing.
6. Moving boxes that you pack to take to another house.
7. Moving Van that UO packs and unpacks when you move to a new house. I would have paid a good amount of gold for UO to do this when I moved from one castle to another. 3 days packing and moving and I am still, 2 weeks later, trying to put everything back the way it was. {The 2 moving boxes are one use only at a price per max house storage, so a 7x7 would cost less than a 31x31. This is just an example: 7x7 cost 780K and a 31x31 would cost 7.5M just to move. I used 1000 gold x max storage. Maybe double or triple for the Van.}
8. House storage container that does not count against your house count. Not sure of the cost for this.
9. House rental. Not sure about price/types/size. Auto rent pay 1/3/6 mo just like your account but not with the 90 day free like with housing. Maybe 1 per shard and limit the size. Account must remain active to keep this. Maybe a 5 day IDOC timer. Gold taken from bank of owner.

1. Let accounts younger than 6 mos. sell to NPC's.
2. Perfect.
3. Yes. Having a gold sink is great only if players sink gold into it. If there is no perceived value, why should anyone pay?
4. Yes.
5. Yes, but again, price it so most can afford it.
6. Yes, with pricing again.
7. Double plus good idea
8. Make it cost gold, not dollars.
9. Rent rooms at the inn work it like the stable, but more expensive. Also storage space available at the inn. You know like the hotel safe. Let players rent rooms at the inn on multiple shards.

One note. Gold sinks that target the ultra-wealthy don't work. Most people don't see themselves as wealthy even if they are. Price gold sinks with value in mind. More people will sink gold this way.

 

[aarons6]

i dont understand why everyone is arguing about WHY the economy is inflated.. just get over the fact it is.. and its not going to be fixed..

what needs to be changed is currency.. 1m checks is outdated. things cost more then you can hold..
we dont need to argue why things cost more then we can hold.

we need to get our point across that we need a change to the amount we can hold so we can purchase items without having to trust someone.

 

[Lady CaT]

i dont understand why everyone is arguing about WHY the economy is inflated.. just get over the fact it is.. and its not going to be fixed..

lol........kinda like i don't understand why everyone is arguing about WHY trade amounts need to be increased...just get over the fact you can't...and its not going to be fixed?

You opened the can of worms! Now you get to see all the slimy things inside

Seriously just find a broker for your big trades! It would probably be a whole lot quicker than waiting for an in game solution.

 

[aarons6]

lol........kinda like i don't understand why everyone is arguing about WHY trade amounts need to be increased...just get over the fact you can't...and its not going to be fixed?

You opened the can of worms! Now you get to see all the slimy things inside

Seriously just find a broker for your big trades! It would probably be a whole lot quicker than waiting for an in game solution.

you make it sound like it never happens.

having a char on a shard you cant have a house on, like ATL.
i got ONE item and it sold more then i could even put in my bank.
i had to trust the guy to give me checks on 3 chars


it should never be this way.

 

[Lord Frodo]

In the real world old money is removed from the market and in UO it stays.

Not knowing exactly what you mean, I'll take your statement in and of itself. This is rare in the modern world. A central bank can sell government bonds to soak up money, reducing the monetary supply. On net, this isn't happening as the world's major central banks keep printing money so that governments can deficit-spend their way out of crises.

So when you made that statement, I really don't know what you could be referring to.

Are you sure you even took ECON 101? Try reading this http://www.theatlantic.com/business...of-money-who-does-it-why-when-and-how/236990/

 

[Lord Frodo]

.

Please do not credit him with that list. Those ideas are from this post

Some things right now that may help.

1. NPCs no longer buy goods and their prices stay the same.
2. House customization, right now UO gives you back everything you put in. UO should only give back the cost of the land and nothing more. You want walls, floor and a roof then you pay for it, no refund. Find a way to customize Castles and Keeps and I do not mean Borg Cubes either. Yes I would pay for this just to be able to remove/move some walls, floors and stairs. If you remove all stairs then you will need to buy tiles to move from floor to floor. No outside walls may be moved but charge a fee to change type of stone used maybe 3-4 types only. Big fee to remove trees or anything else that may be inside the foundation area and will return when the house is removed/resized.
3. Deco that the players will buy that only costs an arm, not an arm and a leg.
4. Drop the gold/point ratio on the Collection Systems to reflect the UO World value.
5. Whole house rental boxes for house resizing.
6. Moving boxes that you pack to take to another house.
7. Moving Van that UO packs and unpacks when you move to a new house. I would have paid a good amount of gold for UO to do this when I moved from one castle to another. 3 days packing and moving and I am still, 2 weeks later, trying to put everything back the way it was. {The 2 moving boxes are one use only at a price per max house storage, so a 7x7 would cost less than a 31x31. This is just an example: 7x7 cost 780K and a 31x31 would cost 7.5M just to move. I used 1000 gold x max storage. Maybe double or triple for the Van.}
8. House storage container that does not count against your house count. Not sure of the cost for this.
9. House rental. Not sure about price/types/size. Auto rent pay 1/3/6 mo just like your account but not with the 90 day free like with housing. Maybe 1 per shard and limit the size. Account must remain active to keep this. Maybe a 5 day IDOC timer. Gold taken from bank of owner.

These are all GOLD ideas only.

 

[virtualhabitat]

I am really neutral on who said it first. I saw it first in post 174. Take up your copyright issues with him, not me.

1. NPCs no longer buy goods and their prices stay the same.
2. House customization, right now UO gives you back everything you put in. UO should only give back the cost of the land and nothing more. You want walls, floor and a roof then you pay for it, no refund. Find a way to customize Castles and Keeps and I do not mean Borg Cubes either. Yes I would pay for this just to be able to remove/move some walls, floors and stairs. If you remove all stairs then you will need to buy tiles to move from floor to floor. No outside walls may be moved but charge a fee to change type of stone used maybe 3-4 types only. Big fee to remove trees or anything else that may be inside the foundation area and will return when the house is removed/resized.
3. Deco that the players will buy that only costs an arm, not an arm and a leg.
4. Drop the gold/point ratio on the Collection Systems to reflect the UO World value.
5. Whole house rental boxes for house resizing.
6. Moving boxes that you pack to take to another house.
7. Moving Van that UO packs and unpacks when you move to a new house. I would have paid a good amount of gold for UO to do this when I moved from one castle to another. 3 days packing and moving and I am still, 2 weeks later, trying to put everything back the way it was. {The 2 moving boxes are one use only at a price per max house storage, so a 7x7 would cost less than a 31x31. This is just an example: 7x7 cost 780K and a 31x31 would cost 7.5M just to move. I used 1000 gold x max storage. Maybe double or triple for the Van.}
8. House storage container that does not count against your house count. Not sure of the cost for this.
9. House rental. Not sure about price/types/size. Auto rent pay 1/3/6 mo just like your account but not with the 90 day free like with housing. Maybe 1 per shard and limit the size. Account must remain active to keep this. Maybe a 5 day IDOC timer. Gold taken from bank of owner.

1. Let accounts younger than 6 mos. sell to NPC's.
2. Perfect.
3. Yes. Having a gold sink is great only if players sink gold into it. If there is no perceived value, why should anyone pay?
4. Yes.
5. Yes, but again, price it so most can afford it.
6. Yes, with pricing again.
7. Double plus good idea
8. Make it cost gold, not dollars.
9. Rent rooms at the inn work it like the stable, but more expensive. Also storage space available at the inn. You know like the hotel safe. Let players rent rooms at the inn on multiple shards.

One note. Gold sinks that target the ultra-wealthy don't work. Most people don't see themselves as wealthy even if they are. Price gold sinks with value in mind. More people will sink gold this way.

 

[Uvtha]

I'm not against gold sinks per say, but really the impact they have on inflation is limited at this point. Mainly because unless it's forced it's unreliable. And if its forced it's not fun, and not worth it. All of those above items are fine with me though, since none are too intrusive. Every little bit helps, of course.

I think they need to re look at how gold enters the game for starters. It's just too easy for gold to pile up quickly on a global scale.

 

[The Zog historian]

Are you sure you even took ECON 101? Try reading this http://www.theatlantic.com/business...of-money-who-does-it-why-when-and-how/236990/

Oh lord, please take some friendly advice and don't go to that rag for meaningful economic information. I would have told you that even before you gave that link. Whoever that guy is, he has zero clue. If he did, he wouldn't bother talking about destruction of paper notes as having any meaningful effect. No student in a decent school would ever hear it called the "destruction" of money, rather "reduction of the money supply. An introductory macroeconomics student would be told about central banks selling bonds to absorb money, not the physical destruction of notes.

And if you bothered to read to the end, you'd have seen that "journalist" even concedes: "But don't fret: although money is being destroyed on a regular basis, it's being crated even more quickly. Currency grows at a relatively stable rate each year. So the net amount of money out there doesn't generally decline. In that sense, money is really never destroyed."

Well la de da!

Now look here instead, numbers straight from the Federal Reserve. These are the measurements of money that matter, not how much paper currency is out there.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/RELEASES/h6/current/default.htm

Throw those into your favorite spreadsheet calculator and see the month-on-month changes. Any occasional declines are far more than offset by all the increases. It is fact what I stated, that the Federal Reserve is monetizing nearly all new U.S. Treasury debt (that means creating new money to buy the bonds). Thus we're talking several hundred billion new dollars created annually. Even if the Fed destroyed all these mere billions of dollars of currency and didn't create anymore, the money supply would hardly be shrinking.

Those are conventional measurements that no serious economist denies. If you want an unorthodox take on the money supply's true growth, read some things by a close friend of mine. http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpollaro/

Any questions, class? Bueller? Bueller?

Perhaps someday I'll get you a copy of the thesis I did a decade ago (it's still on file at my uni) on the U.S. current account deficit and its implications. Before then, what you should not doubt for a moment is that I know my subject.

 

[The Zog historian]

I'm not against gold sinks per say, but really the impact they have on inflation is limited at this point. Mainly because unless it's forced it's unreliable. And if its forced it's not fun, and not worth it. All of those above items are fine with me though, since none are too intrusive. Every little bit helps, of course.

I think they need to re look at how gold enters the game for starters. It's just too easy for gold to pile up quickly on a global scale.

We've always grumbled at mere hints we'd have to sink gold into things we didn't want. It was late 1998, I think, when the Devs then talked about taxes and/or weekly maintenance as part of the upcoming housing changes: x amount of gold per week, y amount of ingots, z amount of boards. This was part of their initial ideas to restrict player housing. There was such a huge outcry here and on Crossroads of Britannia that any such proposals were scrapped.

 

[Tina Small]

I was trying to find an old post I made with some ideas for gold sinks and finally found it here in "The Big Economy Thread" of April 2011: http://stratics.com/community/threads/the-big-economy-thread.238825/page-5#post-1939631. However, as I was browsing that thread , I came across some posts that Phoenix made that might be worth bringing back for discussion, just in case the dev team has done some work on this idea of a "magic blessed bag." (Doubtful, I know, because he did say it was a hypothetical situation.)

First post from Phoenix regarding the bag (sorry the formatting is so wacky, I've given up trying to get it right): [ http://stratics.com/community/threads/the-big-economy-thread.238825/page-4#post-1938865 ]

Reagents are an interesting subject. Here's a question:

BUT FIRST, THIS IS PURELY HYPOTHETICAL. This is not an idea that we are considering implementing.

Suppose there were a magic blessed bag that could hold up to 100 stone of reagents and scrolls, but in order for it to work you would have to feed it gold on an hourly basis -- otherwise it loses its blessing. How much gold would you be willing to feed it, and how did you arrive at that number?

AGAIN, THIS IS PURELY HYPOTHETICAL. My purpose in posing that question is to elicit some responses specifically about the value of reagents, and LRC, and scrolls.

And these are some additional comments he made a little further along in the thread in response to feedback from two players regarding the magic blessed bag: [http://stratics.com/community/threads/the-big-economy-thread.238825/page-4#post-1938900 ]

Wojoe said: The problem is if you tax regents and/or LRC it become's a magic user nerf. So unless you somehow tax people that use weapons to fight its totaly unfair. You would have to require weapon users to carry something to offset the tax unbalance or buff magic users to offset the extra burdon.

Assume such a hypothetical addition would be completely optional. Nothing is changed about LRC or even the ability to carry regs around in normal bags. How much would it be worth to you to have the blessed reg bag option?​

The next problem is it opens up alot of room on magic users suits that could be unbalancing.

It seems to me that those options are already there, if you're willing to use reagents. 100% LRC is not required for casters yet it seems to be a must-have, just like max resists.​

​

What I'm essentially asking here is how much is that LRC actually worth to you, and why?​

​

Again, keep in mind that this is an entirely hypothetical exercise; a thought experiment if you will. This represents the kind of new gold sink that could make a lot of sense. It doesn't arbitrarily introduce a new tax and it adds new optional benefits.​

​

On the downside, it's one of those things that would be difficult to price, and the reasons for that are at the heart of the purpose for a thread. That is why I want to see discussion along those lines.​

​

There are some other posts from Phoenix buried in that thread, but I haven't done them all out yet. Too hard to get the formatting right on here today with all the lag.

One more quote from Phoenix from that thread [http://stratics.com/community/threads/the-big-economy-thread.238825/page-7#post-1952627] and hopefully the formatting isn't totally wonky:

virtualhabitat said: ↑

the cost of saltpeter @551 gold per each on Great Lakes...Seriously, can someone explain how this helps the economy?​

This is a perfect example of the type of inflation that the game's economy has undergone.

Saltpeter's price floats using a "commodity trader" algorithm. As players purchase it from the NPC, the NPC raises its price, simulating scarcity. As players sell back to the NPC, it lowers its price, simulating glut. Thus, the price of the item is determined by actual supply and demand.

The alternative to buying saltpeter is to mine it. It can be mined at a rate of 1,000 units or more per hour in a dungeon, with a mediocre luck suit and GM mining skill. It can also be mined at a lower rate from the safety of the deck of a ship. This means it is definitely possible to make gunpowder by investing time instead of gold into it.

The NPC pays 75% of its asking price when buying the commodity item from players. So if they're charging 500gp per unit to sell, they will pay 400gp per unit to buy. So, if you can mine 1,000 saltpeter per hour, that means you can sell it to the NPC and make 400K gold per hour. If you're selling saltpeter, you also have the option of selling directly to other players, undercutting the NPC price, to make more than what the NPC offers.

That's it for me. Not sure this post adds much to this thread. However, it might be interesting for folks to go back to that other thread and read through it, if for nothing else but to see the diversity of ideas that were posted. It is sad to see so many posts made by people who no longer post here and/or who may not even play anymore.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

*sighs* This is not a good morning for Stratics.

There is not universal agreement on what the problems are. As I've pointed out, repeatedly, historically there's been an equal number (roughly) of posts complaining that things cost too much as complaining that things are too cheap.

To argue that EM event items have somehow caused inflation is stupid, for all the reasons cited by myself and others, basically being that the items don't actually create wealth. The items are not "a chest full of 100 1 million gold cheques."

To make analogies to RL economics is also stupid. This is not an RL economy and economists have a hard enough time explaining RL economics, let alone fake economics.

-Galen's player

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

*sighs* This is not a good morning for Stratics.

There is not universal agreement on what the problems are. As I've pointed out, repeatedly, historically there's been an equal number (roughly) of posts complaining that things cost too much as complaining that things are too cheap.

To argue that EM event items have somehow caused inflation is stupid, for all the reasons cited by myself and others, basically being that the items don't actually create wealth. The items are not "a chest full of 100 1 million gold cheques."

To make analogies to RL economics is also stupid. This is not an RL economy and economists have a hard enough time explaining RL economics, let alone fake economics.

-Galen's player

 

[The Zog historian]

To make analogies to RL economics is also stupid. This is not an RL economy and economists have a hard enough time explaining RL economics, let alone fake economics.

In fact, there are basic principles that apply as much to a virtual world as the real world. No economists -- that is, no serious economists, unlike hacks writing for The Atlantic -- argue over whether a new item causes inflation. There's just no disagreement on that in any serious circle.

By "fake" I don't know who you're referring to, but you are welcome to attempt to find any flaws in what I've posted.

 

[Lord Frodo]

In fact, there are basic principles that apply as much to a virtual world as the real world. No economists -- that is, no serious economists, unlike hacks writing for The Atlantic -- argue over whether a new item causes inflation. There's just no disagreement on that in any serious circle.

By "fake" I don't know who you're referring to, but you are welcome to attempt to find any flaws in what I've posted.

And you sir are a joke for the simple fact that you had no clue that the US destroys old money and do not just keep putting new money out in the rl world. It does not matter where that fact comes from it is still a fact. What rag do you write for. None I bet.

 

[JC the Builder]

I didn't think the price could go any lower when it was at 50 cents. Now it is at 10 cents per million and to offer a decent prize for a contest you win 300 million gold.

 

[aarons6]

I didn't think the price could go any lower when it was at 50 cents. Now it is at 10 cents per million and to offer a decent prize for a contest you win 300 million gold.

which if you dont have a house on that shard you cant hold

 

[The Zog historian]

And you sir are a joke for the simple fact that you had no clue that the US destroys old money and do not just keep putting new money out in the rl world. It does not matter where that fact comes from it is still a fact. What rag do you write for. None I bet.

You are the joke. You didn't even read your own link, where the guy admits that new money is created to replace bills -- bills that are destroyed not to reduce the money supply, but because they are physically old, and then they're replaced with new ones.

Here it is again: "But don't fret: although money is being destroyed on a regular basis, it's being crated even more quickly. Currency grows at a relatively stable rate each year. So the net amount of money out there doesn't generally decline. In that sense, money is really never destroyed."

I do better than work for a silly rag, nor am I someone like that guy who evidently couldn't make it finance and turned to putting out a lot of words saying nothing. What I wrote is worth repeating:

Not knowing exactly what you mean, I'll take your statement in and of itself. This is rare in the modern world. A central bank can sell government bonds to soak up money, reducing the monetary supply. On net, this isn't happening as the world's major central banks keep printing money so that governments can deficit-spend their way out of crises.


Even when Spanish galleons would sink now and then, the lost gold hadn't yet hit the Old World's economy, so there was no removal of money. Egypt's pharaohs of old were

Every so often, a modern economy will see a central bank drastically cut the money supply itself, like from 1929-1933 when the Federal Reserve cut M1 by a fourth and M2 by nearly a third. Since then, the usual practice isn't to cut the money supply itself, but to cut the growth in the money supply. At Reagan's direction, Volcker cut growth dramatically. There were some "cuts" but those were offset by other increases.

Are you referring to someone putting money under a mattress, taking it out of circulation? This is insignificant compared to the total money supply. The money has already been created. Besides, as I have explained, the discovery process of inflation is when people act on the money. The money's already there, and it's going to be spent someday, unless these insignificant amounts are somehow destroyed.

So when you made that statement, I really don't know what you could be referring to.

Now look here instead, numbers straight from the Federal Reserve. These are the measurements of money that matter, not how much paper currency is out there.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/RELEASES/h6/current/default.htm

Throw those into your favorite spreadsheet calculator and see the month-on-month changes. Any occasional declines are far more than offset by all the increases. It is fact what I stated, that the Federal Reserve is monetizing nearly all new U.S. Treasury debt (that means creating new money to buy the bonds). Thus we're talking several hundred billion new dollars created annually. Even if the Fed destroyed all these mere billions of dollars of currency and didn't create anymore, the money supply would hardly be shrinking.

Those are conventional measurements that no serious economist denies. If you want an unorthodox take on the money supply's true growth, read some things by a close friend of mine. http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpollaro/

By the way, nice non-rebuttal on not one damn thing I wrote. Do you seriously, truly think that money in the real world is destroyed on net? Reducing the money supply isn't a matter of destroying paper. It's a matter of taking more paper currency out of circulation than is put in, a central bank selling bonds to soak up money, and raising interest rates to curb the creation of new money (bank ABC wants to lend, it doesn't have sufficient funds, so it borrows at the FFR and lends at higher rates to the client). And you, "sir," I'll wager, had no clue about any of that.

Thanks for playing. Class dismissed.

 

[The Zog historian]

And you sir are a joke for the simple fact that you had no clue that the US destroys old money and do not just keep putting new money out in the rl world. It does not matter where that fact comes from it is still a fact. What rag do you write for. None I bet.

Oh, and now that I re-read your statement about "and do not just keep putting out new money"?

Bzzt. You are completely, utterly, without any equivocation, flat-out plan WRONG there.

The supply of dollars, on paper and electronically, is ever-increasing on net, As I said, go check out the Federal Reserve's own numbers. They are, after all, THE ONES WHO KNOW THE DOLLAR NUMBERS BECAUSE THEY CREATE THE MONEY.

Don't, just DON'T argue with me about such things you know so little about.

 

[Tina Small]

It would be interesting to know whether the in-game casinos that EA added to the game have turned out to be a gold sink or a gold faucet. Every once in a while, I log in on Sonoma and hear someone talking in general chat about how well he is doing at the casino. What has been the experience of other players? I've looked around a few times, mostly because I was doing a t-map in the area, but have never tried any of the games. I also wonder what effect, if any, the addition of the in-game casino has had on player-run casinos. I thought there was a very elaborate one on Atlantic but I rarely log in there and don't know if it is still active.

 

[CorwinXX]

10. Increase gold to titling points ratio.
11. Add special points (that you can buy for gold) that are spent when you cast a spell without spending regs (using LRC).
12. Add a resource (that you can buy from NPC) that you need for any repair.
13. Increase insurance cost. Add some insurance cost for blessed items.

 

[Uvtha]

10. Increase gold to titling points ratio.
11. Add special points (that you can buy for gold) that are spent when you cast a spell without spending regs (using LRC).
12. Add a resource (that you can buy from NPC) that you need for any repair.
13. Increase insurance cost. Add some insurance cost for blessed items.

Those things would just annoy people and provide them with nothing. There are better ways to address the issue.

 

[CorwinXX]

Player must spend gold while fighting monsters. And players must spend even more gold while training skills.

 

[Herman]

*sighs* This is not a good morning for Stratics.



To argue that EM event items have somehow caused inflation is stupid, for all the reasons cited by myself and others, basically being that the items don't actually create wealth. The items are not "a chest full of 100 1 million gold cheques."



-Galen's player

I tryed this already with one person now i m going to try it again
I can not force you to understand i tryed that already and it did not work you need to figure this out yourself

Think for this for awhile

People can not know how much total gold is in the world and they can not price the stuff based on that because they do not know

what they can know is how much gold people spend

And that is what they base how high and low they are going to price an item

Now picture a player that got alot of gold and nothing to buy (player A)... you can not say this is impossible because in uo it can happen nothing prevents it

It probably will not take that long before people selling stuff realise that this player do not buy anything and because he does not buy anything his gold can not make sellers expect to get more for the items and the only one that can change the prices is the seller

Now picture new items come in play that the passive player(player A) with alot of gold want so he start buying these

sellers start to expect to get more for these new items and the prices go up on these items

The gold that once was in the hands of the passive player(player A) go to players that did not have everything (player B) and they start to buy other things and the prices go up on those items

The effect that (player A) gold have on the market is identical to a scenario where you dupe gold and give it to (player B)

Cause and effect have to be connected

If the effect is that a seller put a higher price on items
Then the cause should be
That the seller expect to get more gold for the items

And I know you are going to say.. you can not have inflation without any gold... well you can affect prices without any gold if i convince a seller that his items are worth more than what he price them at and he agree with me then no gold was needed to make the price go up on his items even if only for a short while untill he realise i trick him

This is probaby not going to convice you but i hope it did raise a ?

No need to reply if you like to do so Do it
but i m not going to answer unless you pm me

 

[The Zog historian]

It would be interesting to know whether the in-game casinos that EA added to the game have turned out to be a gold sink or a gold faucet. Every once in a while, I log in on Sonoma and hear someone talking in general chat about how well he is doing at the casino. What has been the experience of other players? I've looked around a few times, mostly because I was doing a t-map in the area, but have never tried any of the games. I also wonder what effect, if any, the addition of the in-game casino has had on player-run casinos. I thought there was a very elaborate one on Atlantic but I rarely log in there and don't know if it is still active.

Sometimes I wonder if he's the only guy who goes there. I don't even know where it is.

Mohegan Sun, Foxwoods, Atlantic City and Las Vegas work because of the overall experience. (I've never tried Empire City after hearing more negative things than positive.) Staying in a nice hotel, buffets, discounted steak dinners, etc., leave most people not minding too much that they lost. I don't see what the UO casino's model is.

 

[The Zog historian]

I tryed this already with one person now i m going to try it again
I can not force you to understand i tryed that already and it did not work you need to figure this out yourself

Think for this for awhile

People can not know how much total gold is in the world and they can not price the stuff based on that because they do not know

what they can know is how much gold people spend

And that is what they base how high and low they are going to price an item

You are correct here. This is in fact what I have been saying.

Prices are a discovery process. Sellers discover that they can charge more, or that they must charge less, by the actions of buyers. If someone always buys out Powder of Fortifying on a vendor, the seller may be able to charge more. As the supply of gold has increased, sellers know they can charge more. They also want to charge more so that they can earn more to buy things themselves -- from sellers who are charging more.

Example: way back in the day, I used to sell GM leather armor suits on my vendor near the Yew abbey. There was no Trammel, and at the time the PvP hotspot was between the abbey and Yew moongate. If I priced a full suit at 750 gold, the suits sold as if I was giving them away. If I priced them at 1500 gold, I sold perhaps one suit a day. I think I settled on 850 gold, which was not worth my time to harvest leather and sew.

Now picture a player that got alot of gold and nothing to buy (player A)... you can not say this is impossible because in uo it can happen nothing prevents it

OK, stop there. Nobody amasses a large amount of money just to have it. The very purpose of money is to spend it. This applies to UO as well as the real world.

It probably will not take that long before people selling stuff realise that this player do not buy anything and because he does not buy anything his gold can not make sellers expect to get more for the items and the only one that can change the prices is the seller

But if a person is not spending money, nobody knows that he has any money. When I check out Luna vendors, nobody knows if I have 100 gold or 100 million gold.

Now picture new items come in play that the passive player(player A) with alot of gold want so he start buying these

sellers start to expect to get more for these new items and the prices go up on these items

The gold that once was in the hands of the passive player(player A) go to players that did not have everything (player B) and they start to buy other things and the prices go up on those items

The effect that (player A) gold have on the market is identical to a scenario where you dupe gold and give it to (player B)


Cause and effect have to be connected

If the effect is that a seller put a higher price on items
Then the cause should be
That the seller expect to get more gold for the items

And I know you are going to say.. you can not have inflation without any gold... well you can affect prices without any gold if i convince a seller that his items are worth more than what he price them at and he agree with me then no gold was needed to make the price go up on his items

This is probaby not going to convice you but i hope it did raise a ?

No need to reply if you like to do so Do it
but i m not going to answer unless you pm me

Your scenario is incorrect, and you do not seem to understand. Inflation is because there is more gold, new gold, than before.

If there is 1 million gold total on a UO server, any new items for sale must take from the existing gold supply. Therefore prices for everything else must go down. This is why a money supply that doesn't grow, when demand for money grows (like with an increasing population), is deflationary.

If there is 1 million gold total on a UO server, and someone pays 100K for a desirable new item, that does not by itself create inflation. The effect is not at all like when someone dupes gold. But if someone farmed monsters, macroed tailoring to sell fancy shirts to NPCs, or duped gold, to get the 100K to pay for the item (or replenish his 100K), that is what creates inflation.

What you said about "If the effect is that" is another truism. It's stating the obvious. Of course sellers ask higher prices because they think they can get them -- why would they not? What we are talking about is why sellers think they can ask higher prices.

 

[THP]

u kids really think u know it all...lol.... !!..alas i guess my own teenagers think they do too...[whatever] [end]

 

[Uvtha]

People can not know how much total gold is in the world and they can not price the stuff based on that because they do not know

what they can know is how much gold people spend

And that is what they base how high and low they are going to price an item

Well, people also base prices on how much money THEY have, how much common items cost, and how easy it is for them to get money.

I agree that rares have a skewed market because everyone who deals in rares has a billion+ gold, but those items don't effect gameplay at all. And these skewed markets CAN effect regular markets when the uber rich need to buy something other than rares, but that also makes it easier for people to make money because they can sell items for more gold to the uber rich, which is just supply and demand.

Theres really only one way to stop these kind of high price markets and thats to normalize rarity across the board, which would have a much greater effect on how things work.

 

[Uvtha]

u kids really think u know it all...lol.... !!..alas i guess my own teenagers think they do too...[whatever] [end]

Hah... unlike you, right?

 

[Smoot]

95percent of this thread is really dumb.

gold sinks would be nice. not hard to do either.

some ideas:
Special dye you can only pay npc for gold with. 50mil per charge.
Npc only harid dye - 500k was alot when it first came out. - update to 50 or 100mil
skill bonus above 720cap - 500mil per ten points up to 760

those are just some examples. nothing game changing, but things people would definitely drop gold on.