The market will continue to be free, simply now there is a reference value that is determined by the buyers. Nothing prevents you from putting a lower or higher price.
“ If by “on welfare” you mean that she was dependent on unemployment benefits or food stamps or other government programs for sustenance, then no.
Ayn Rand did receive Social Security benefits in the last 8 or 9 years of her life, but the amount of money she received was inconsequential, as she had a considerable income from book royalties and speaking fees. She was still paying several times as much in taxes than she was getting in SS payments, so at best this represented a small tax refund. That alone indicates that she had an income that made her independent of any welfare from the government.
According to one source, between herself and her husband Frank Oconnor, she received about $14,000 over 8 years, but was still paying $9,000 per year in taxes.
Lying about Ayn Rand and Social Security
That means she was getting about $1,750 per year, reducing her tax burden to $7, 250.
And that may have been just her Social Security taxes. Her income tax burden may have been higher.
She was wealthy enough to not only retain a lawfirm, which is often central to the smear stories spread about her, but a live-in maid and a secretary. She left her maid a generous gift in her will. And she left enough to her intellectual heir to found the Ayn Rand Institute, which still receives much of its revenue from book sales and royalties.
And there was nothing hypocritical about this, even if she was getting a significant income from welfare programs. She argued that taxation is theft. The tax money that is taken from you against your will is stolen, and anyone who opposes such theft has a right to any restitution they can get.”
Sounds needlessly complicated and unnecessary. People will complain no matter what system is in place, but keeping things relatively simple like they are now is probably best.
2 Likes
Tell me you are an 1d1ot w/o telling me you are an 1d1ot:
“YoU WaNnA BrInG CoMmunIsM iNtO WoW? W O W!!!1!!!”
hehehe, it’s amazing how many people think that simply adding a SUGGESTED price, they consider it something “communist”.
people who tell you otherwise are abusing the living crap outta AH and they dont want things to change or it gonna ruin their little game.
I want to think not. Because in the end… we all benefit from having more stable and less speculative prices.
Tsm is honestly screen cancer.
It is probably the single ugliest user interface addon I have ever seen in this game. No exaggeration.
Your message only gives more reasons why it is necessary to add an internal market value. There really is a market distortion of the users who use and those who don’t use the TSM.
The AH is screwed for shadowlands. I don’t think it will have time to course correct before Dragonflight.
The biggest is are the bots on smaller/dead realms able to go uninterrupted and undetected flooding the AH with mats.
My advice is to just cut your losses, dump what you and get what you can and start fresh in DF unless you’re into the pet/transmog game.
The argument goes both ways though, then.
If you are going to hardcap the downside you need to hardcap the upside.
How much profit is acceptable profit? 5%? 15%? 25%?
And if you are just hardcapping profit and pricing, why do you even need people doing the work? Why not just create vendors that you bring mats to and you get the end result?
This is the same discussion that’s occurred in economics for centuries.
It would be better to just have many merged economies instead of one super economy for every region. Mats would be low but they would also still have enough value to be worth farming.
I am currently working on an interface to create purchase orders… I hope you like it.
Of course, all this is at the level of proposals.
It all depends on blizzard if they implement it or not… and of course, on the support of the community.
I also support the idea, this is necessary.
1 Like