Steward Breds Leaving, why is this happening again?

[Tim Matthews]

...

A tiered wealth tythe is the most popular and effective way to take money out of the game. However, some people think a tythe is not the way to go. Sadly, these people have never come up with a good argument against it (although they have tried very, very hard - bless their hearts).

...

Please, I beg of you, anyone, come up with a good argument against the tythe. "It makes me mad" is not a good argument. Unfortunately for my opponents, I am allergic to missing - I swish long distance 3s only. Godspeed!

I think the X-Man was trying to gently show you the flaw in your argument. Suppose we use $40M for the maximum balance of Sim$. If one is playing logically, one would purchase other assets to ensure one''s balance is below $40M -- most likely by purchasing horses. So the demand for horses would increase. So prices would go up -- producing inflation.

A tierd tythe strongly encourages a player to transfer their wealth from Sim$ into horse ownership. So the demand for horses would increase. So prices would go up -- producing inflation.

Nope! There's atually no such incentive. That is a bad strategy. If you want to overspend on horses/etc just so that you can be in a lower bracket, you lose money (surely you understand how tythe (tax) brackets work?). You would be free to do so, but the money would be tythed either way (from your account or from the selling player's account - remember that everyone gets tythed!). There's no money added - in fact, quite literally the opposite.

Without money being taken out of the game, it just keeps piling up due to purses, and gradually becomes less valuable, which will be the type of inflation at hand after TBS auctions go away.

[Ronnie Dee]

...

A tiered wealth tythe is the most popular and effective way to take money out of the game. However, some people think a tythe is not the way to go. Sadly, these people have never come up with a good argument against it (although they have tried very, very hard - bless their hearts).

...

Please, I beg of you, anyone, come up with a good argument against the tythe. "It makes me mad" is not a good argument. Unfortunately for my opponents, I am allergic to missing - I swish long distance 3s only. Godspeed!

I think the X-Man was trying to gently show you the flaw in your argument. Suppose we use $40M for the maximum balance of Sim$. If one is playing logically, one would purchase other assets to ensure one''s balance is below $40M -- most likely by purchasing horses. So the demand for horses would increase. So prices would go up -- producing inflation.

A tierd tythe strongly encourages a player to transfer their wealth from Sim$ into horse ownership. So the demand for horses would increase. So prices would go up -- producing inflation.

Nope! There's atually no such incentive...

There are 4 main assets in the Sim:
1. Sim$
2. Horses
3. GPs
4. Farms

If you tax only #1, one can reduces one's tax burden by exchanging these assets for assets in the other categories. This will increase the demand for the other 3 asset categories. This will increase their demand. If demand increases, prices go up.

[Nena Olson]

I think another thing that people often overlook is this that the horses that people pay billions of dollars for in The Steward bred auction are usually the ones with the best pedigrees and the ones that end up freaks. Sure they may pay $10 mil for a horse but it is very rare for those top ones to be duds on the track AND breeding shed. So, they either go off to be a stud which brings in more money, on top of their race earnings, or a filly that wins money on the track and then produces other stars that bring money on the track/race earnings. You cannot tell me that they just threw away $10 million and never saw that $10 mil again. They just brought in more and produced even more earners. The ones that tend to be slow stakes or allowances who don't do as great on the track are the ones that the smaller barns get for $2 mil or less. So they toss out their $2 mil and probably won't see it back.

[Tim Matthews]

I think the X-Man was trying to gently show you the flaw in your argument. Suppose we use $40M for the maximum balance of Sim$. If one is playing logically, one would purchase other assets to ensure one''s balance is below $40M -- most likely by purchasing horses. So the demand for horses would increase. So prices would go up -- producing inflation.

A tierd tythe strongly encourages a player to transfer their wealth from Sim$ into horse ownership. So the demand for horses would increase. So prices would go up -- producing inflation.

Nope! There's atually no such incentive...

There are 4 main assets in the Sim:
1. Sim$
2. Horses
3. GPs
4. Farms

If you tax only #1, one can reduces one's tax burden by exchanging these assets for assets in the other categories. This will increase the demand for the other 3 asset categories. This will increase their demand. If demand increases, prices go up.

Go ahead and reduce your "tax burden" by buying all my allowance gallopers for $500k each. Please! You will have way less money in your account, but you'll be paying less in tythes too, which is apparently your ultimate goal.

Honestly, Ronnie, this is simple stuff. Let me try to walk you through this as if I were talking to a large adult.

Let's say, just as a quick example, that the tythe brackets are as follows:

$0-$1 million: 5%
$1 million-$5 million: 10%
Over $5 million: 15%
(I just came up with these numbers at random, I'm not saying this is how it should be.)

To help you understand what this means, think about Player A. Let's say Player A has 6 million dollars.

Her first million is tythed at 5%. This means the she pays $50,000 out of her first million. Then, her money from $1 million to $5 million is tythed at 10%. This means that she pays $400,0000 from this bracket. Then, the last million she has is tythed at 15%. This means she pays $150,000 out of this bracket. If you add up these numbers, Player A would pay $600,000 in tythes, leaving her with $5.4 million.

But let's also say that Player A has a really large brain. Since she has a large brain, she wants to "reduce her tythe burden." She wants to be in a lower tythe bracket, because she thinks this will somehow help her. So she offers to buy a bunch of horses (or GPs, or farms) at inflated prices.

So let's say Player A spends $1 million on overpriced horses. She now has $5 million before tythes. When the tythe comes, she only pays $450,000. Great, her burden has been reduced! Unfortunately, the trouble now is that she only has $4.55 million and an extra couple useless horses or overpriced GPs.

So sure, Player A has exchanged money for some different assets, but I hope you are able to see that she is in a worse position after having done so. And if she really wanted to reduce her burden, wouldn't she just spend ALL her money? Then she'd pay nothing in tythes!

And if having more money is so bad, why would anyone sell their horses/GPs/etc? Then they'd be increasing THEIR burden! You have not demonstrated the basic understanding that sellers would get tythed too. Perhaps worst of all, you greatly overestimate how much a change like this would influence player behavior.

Listen, I know we're never getting a tythe system. Who cares, it's a horse game. It's still pretty funny to see people get confused by it.

Also, Blake is nothing compared to Dame. Lol. You tried.

[Mr. Lord Rich]

You cannot tell me that they just threw away $10 million and never saw that $10 mil again. They just brought in more and produced even more earners. The ones that tend to be slow stakes or allowances who don't do as great on the track are the ones that the smaller barns get for $2 mil or less. So they toss out their $2 mil and probably won't see it back.

Ummm ok

https://www.simhorseracing.com/horse.php?HorseID=729219

You don’t always make your money back. Sometimes you throw away 19 million dollars

[Nena Olson]

You cannot tell me that they just threw away $10 million and never saw that $10 mil again. They just brought in more and produced even more earners. The ones that tend to be slow stakes or allowances who don't do as great on the track are the ones that the smaller barns get for $2 mil or less. So they toss out their $2 mil and probably won't see it back.

Ummm ok

https://www.simhorseracing.com/horse.php?HorseID=729219

You don’t always make your money back. Sometimes you throw away 19 million dollars

I didn't say ALL of them, I said most.

Example: https://www.simhorseracing.com/horse.ph ... ID=1127931 cost $5 mil, has already earned $4.4 mil and hasn't even gone to stud yet.

[Ronnie Dee]

Nope! There's atually no such incentive...

There are 4 main assets in the Sim:
1. Sim$
2. Horses
3. GPs
4. Farms

If you tax only #1, one can reduces one's tax burden by exchanging these assets for assets in the other categories. This will increase the demand for the other 3 asset categories. This will increase their demand. If demand increases, prices go up.
[/quote]
Go ahead and reduce your "tax burden" by buying all my allowance gallopers for $500k each. Please! You will have way less money in your account, but you'll be paying less in tythes too, which is apparently your ultimate goal.

Honestly, Ronnie, this is simple stuff. Let me try to walk you through this as if I were talking to a tiny baby.

...
[/quote]
Honestly, Tim your above comment is the main reason why I made my original post. It only took me 2 posts for your to make this sort of remark.

[Lily Wilkins]

[The Steward]

Tim, I like listening to you talk math and taxes and such, but making people feel small because they don't agree with you is not okay.

[Tim Matthews]

Tim, I like listening to you talk math and taxes and such, but making people feel small because they don't agree with you is not okay.

Understood

Honestly, Tim your above comment is the main reason why I made my original post. It only took me 2 posts for your to make this sort of remark.

Your meaning here is unclear. However, I invite you to address the substance of my post rather than my cheekiness.

[Mr. Lord Rich]

Lily wins!

[Andrew Chillin]

First of all, my opponent is essentially hitler

[Tim Matthews]

First of all, my opponent is essentially hitler

It’s very disrespectful to talk about Pete like that.

[Ronnie Dee]

Re: Tim's Tythe/Tax Plan

Economic Assumptions:
A. An excessive increase in the money supply causes inflation.
B. "Substitution Effect": if one type of asset is taxed, a person will transfer some of these taxed assets into non-taxable assets. RL example: tax exempt bonds.
C. Supply and Demand Effect: If demand increases and supply remains unchanged, then it leads to a higher (equilibrium) price.

There are 4 main assets in the Sim:
1. Sim$
2. Horses
3. GPs
4. Farms

My argument:
If you tax only Sim$, one can reduces one's tax burden by exchanging these assets for assets in the other categories (B). This will increase the demand for the other 3 asset categories. This will increase their demand. If demand increases, prices go up (C). So while the Tythe Plan addresses A, there is potential that one of its side effects could be price inflation caused by C.

A minor concern regarding Tythe Tiers:
A player in a higher tier may "loan" some Sim$ to a player in a lower tier. After the taxes are levied, the player in the lower tier will repay the loan minus a fee. So the higher tier player pays less tax and the lower tier receives a portion of the higher tier player's tax savings. To me, this seem like a lot of work to save Sim$ in taxes. But in the last year, a group of players collaborated in splitting and sharing the purses from higher purse allowance races (note: this is not meant to be a criticism of their cleverness but rather the amount of effort players will undertake to acquire a small amount of Sim$).