What is the deal with property trading?

[maramizo]

38 minutes ago, ScottieP said:

Most of the people that have over 1 million are not getting any other sort of income than the paychecks because their roleplay does not bring them income unless it is owning a business that's profitable or, or, or. In addition to that they don't get 600-800$ per paycheck but some even go in -56$ as an example and now add the taxes onto it, 20-30k/week just to hold onto that one house you have will just drain you until you have nothing which makes little sense. This only benefits the ones that are doing script jobs or "meta" jobs(Mapping gets you easy 100k in about 2 hours work) what about the others?

 

When taxes for car sales were introduced I stopped using the dealership and eventually put another person who would represent what you have asked for and guess what? The 200k Drafter you were buying went to 290k+ like many other cars, even I don't like that change but it's what you chose, there is no "We can work this out" but there is "Tax is cutting 20k from the price and owner is cutting 25% of my profit so.. no.". I also know that the cars for new players were introduced that cost $500, well at least 20% of the profits that car dealers were getting back in the day were from cheap cars (Price range: $15,000-$30,000). Completely ruined the RP aspect and profit ratio further. I don't say that car dealers nowadays don't make a ton of profit because they do but it's less(A LOT LESS) humane than it was before.

 

Wanna hear a story? It's probably a bit off topic but.

The other day I went to this dealership and wanted to trade in my Seminole Frontier for a Gallivanter Baller LE LWB, my car had performance upgrades and the Baller was fully upgraded with security. Baller MP price: $112,500 Seminole MP price:$65,000 and you know what the dealer said? He said give me the Seminole and $90,000. $90,000!!! I mean I know this guy and he knows me, he knows where my character is coming from and still went with it. This trade would've been 30-40k cheaper than it is now one year ago and it shows how bad it developed.

 

The real solution here is to release more houses so people have more variety to choose from. A reduction in how many properties you can own is just bad because if you want to change between properties you cannot, you cannot do that even now or you will have to first sell your property and live on the streets and then get into another which is bad enough.

Taxes on house sales would definitely NOT work. Taxes as a % of the property's market price itself would. This should be considered upkeep fees (repairs, etc). People that live in mansions end up spending a large portion of their wealth on the simple upkeep of the mansion. The same should apply here. It would greatly discourage hoarders because now they have to consistently spend their tax money onto simply holding onto their properties.

 

Big difference between a tax on sale, and a tax on paycheck. If you don't have a job that earns you a lot of money, it doesn't make sense that you'd own a mansion. It's that simple.

 

9 hours ago, Power said:

Can't believe there are people actually replying suggesting more taxes and price controls. Did people not learn their lessons after dealerships? People complained about dealership and the admins responded by adding a 5 percent tax of the sell price. Know what happened? Before you use to be able to get a used desirable car with all the upgrades second hand for just about unregistered price. Now? Forget about it Dealerships charging way over sticker price. So used cars ended getting more expensive and now the offers you get from dealers are on your cars are less so it was just a lose lose all around.

Price controls don't work they just create shortages as you see with the house situation on this server. Trying to tax the money out of the system doesn't work. When you have a large money supply but so few goods to spend that money on that large money supply is going to bid up the prices of those limited goods. Fundamental inflation. Remove the price controls on houses and let the market determine prices.

 

Again, same conflation between tax on sale and tax on paycheck. A sale tax discourages property transfer; meaning it would cause inflation. A paycheck tax discourages holding property; meaning it would reduce prices. They both are literal opposites.

Edited June 3, 2021 by maramizo

[Power]

12 minutes ago, maramizo said:

A paycheck tax discourages holding property; meaning it would reduce prices. They both are literal opposites.

Except it won't. You would have to to tax insane percentages for a paycheck tax to be meaningful. All it will be is a nuisance. The goal shouldn't be discouraging people from holding properties but encouraging people to move properties. If you have price controls you simply aren't going to get the movement of property increased. Again people just suggesting things that just sound good in theory.

[maramizo]

1 minute ago, Power said:

Except it won't. You would have to to tax insane percentages for a paycheck tax to be meaningful. All it will be is a nuisance. The goal shouldn't be discouraging people from holding properties but encouraging people to move properties. If you have price controls you simply aren't going to get the movement of property increased. Again people just suggesting things that just sound good in theory.

Stopping people from holding properties is literally the same as encouraging them to move properties... You're overcomplicating it. It's also meant to not just be a nuisance, but more of an accurate estimation of which % of players are supposed to be able to get what property.

[HeyMambo]

55 minutes ago, Power said:

Price controls don't work anyone with a basic understand of history and economics know this. Like that isn't a debate if you can't understand that I see no reason in trying to respond to the rest of your points. Like what happens if Nervous gave a million dollar to everyone on the server? Same thing that would happen IRL massive price inflation, shortages. There are economic laws you can't escape from even in a videogame economy.

What you’re suggesting also lives in theory. In application on an RP server, it doesn’t work in the long term. It’s been shown several times over the years. It only hurts new players and demotivates them from owning any assets such as a house and rewards grinders and long standing players. There has to be a balance and allowing prices to just go up and up and up, which is what they will do, is counterproductive to striking that balance.

 

A video game economy is completely different than a real world economy and sorry to say, normal economic principles don’t always apply. If you can’t understand that, then there is no reason anyone should be responding to the rest of your points either. 

Edited June 3, 2021 by Numelo

[maramizo]

11 minutes ago, Numelo said:

There’s also the fact that a market that “decides itself” doesn’t work in an RP server. It’s been shown multiple times on multiple servers. A video game economy is completely different and sorry to say, normal economic principles don’t always apply. If you can’t understand that, then there is no reason anyone should be debating with you. 

Games are gamed. That's why PM exists. To ensure the rules to the real estate game make sense and make sure everyone has fun. No true free market exists, there is always a form of regulation. Price control however, as a form of regulation, doesn't work.

[HeyMambo]

4 minutes ago, maramizo said:

Games are gamed. That's why PM exists. To ensure the rules to the real estate game make sense and make sure everyone has fun. No true free market exists, there is always a form of regulation. Price control however, as a form of regulation, doesn't work.

Neither does simply allowing prices to skyrocket because the “market says so”. It only hurts the flow of new players in the long term, which has been shown across several servers over the years. Imagine a new player coming in with $200,000 or if some people had their way, no starter money and entry level houses cost millions. This only encourages more grinding and less RP. It’s plain as day what would happen. I agree price controls aren’t the ideal solution, but neither is letting the market decide itself. 

Edited June 3, 2021 by Numelo

[maramizo]

1 minute ago, Numelo said:

Neither does simply allowing prices to skyrocket because the “market says so”. It only hurts the flow of new players in the long term, which has been shown across several servers over the years. Imagine a new player coming in with $200,000 or if some people had their way, no starter money and houses cost millions. This only encourages more grinding and less RP. It’s plain as day what would happen. I agree price controls aren’t the ideal solution, but neither is letting the market decide itself. 

I agree. "Letting the market regulate itself" is the equivalent of slashing a large portion of PM's responsibilities. I don't think that's ever going to happen.

[HeyMambo]

9 minutes ago, maramizo said:

I agree. "Letting the market regulate itself" is the equivalent of slashing a large portion of PM's responsibilities. I don't think that's ever going to happen.

It’s not even that. You have to take into account that we don’t have an economy that regulates itself based on real world conditions. There’s no Federal Reserve controlling interest rates, which trickles down into affecting banks and thus consumers. There’s no bad news about oil lines being shut down or hacked. There’s no stock market that affects people’s 401k’s or long term retirement plans. There’s no real world living expenses for owning a house, no negative cash flow. There’s no housing “market” that becomes a buyers market or sellers market or anything that would cause the market to crash like in the real world. 
 

There’s nothing that poses “risk” to someone’s cash flow other than playing less hours OOC’ly  or not having a job. In this instance, the only thing that would dictate price in an “open” market is supply and demand that has no other external factors mentioned above and more. This would only drive prices up. If people want it, they’ll buy it. There’s nothing to dictate “maybe I shouldn’t overspend on this house by a million dollars because I’ll just grind that money back or sell it for even more when I’m done with it”. There’s no risk to owning a house and that only creates an “up” market and some people obviously don’t understand the negative long term trickle down effects that it would pose on a video game economy.

Edited June 3, 2021 by Numelo

[maramizo]

2 minutes ago, Numelo said:

It’s not even that. You have to take into account that we don’t have an economy that regulates itself based on real world conditions. There’s no Federal Reserve controlling interest rates, which trickles down into affecting banks and thus consumers. There’s no bad news about oil lines being shut down or hacked. There’s no stock market that affects people’s 401k’s or long term retirement plans. There’s no real world living expenses for owning a house, no negative cash flow. There’s no housing “market” that becomes a buyers market or sellers market or anything that would cause the market to crash like in the real world. 
 

There’s nothing that poses “risk” to someone’s cash flow other than playing less hours OOC’ly  or not having a job. In this instance, the only thing that would dictate price in an “open” market is supply and demand that has no other external factors mentioned above and more. This would only drive prices up. If people want it, they’ll buy it. There’s nothing to dictate “maybe I shouldn’t overspend on this house by a million dollars because I’ll just grind that money back or sell it for even more when I’m done with it”. There’s no risk to owning a house and that only creates an “up” market and some people obviously don’t understand the negative long term effects that would pose on a video game economy.

You just listed why the "free market" is regulated. I agree with the fact that it is. I'm saying that this same nature of regulation should be emulated in game.

[HeyMambo]

3 minutes ago, maramizo said:

You just listed why the "free market" is regulated. I agree with the fact that it is. I'm saying that this same nature of regulation should be emulated in game.

I agree. There needs to be a negative cash flow, as tedious as some think it would be. There needs to be certain risks to owning a house. Expenses for upkeep or simulation of real world expenses on a house. Tedious or not, these are things that would help.