Yes, I KNOW it is another thread, but it is such a big subject and I want this thread to look at an economics aspect!
It occurs to me that the tp fee + jobs proposal is like the introduction of a guaranteed basic income. It is not quite unconditional as in the UBI in that it requires 30 mins of work a day in order to get 5 peds of income a day.
For those that tp less than 5 times a day there would be income as a result of the 30 mins. It is likely to be a higher income than from the big field of sweating for many more hours.
After a year, it is planned that people can work for a higher hourly wage.
I assume the average player tps maybe 5 times a day, so in this respect it is economically neutral, but will cost players time if they wish it to be neutral.
However, there will be a cut for the platform and investors, which will have to be paid for by those with higher regular travelling.
In the anti basic income argument the question is posed: who would work if your basic needs were met?
In this scenario it might be: who would still travel around a lot via tp if it cost them to do so?
I've not looked into the speculated tp figures for 2020 mathematically... seems like one heck of an increase though, assuming the 10 million tps per year when free would NOT transfer across 1:1 when fees are charged.
Discuss..... and please keep it on topic to not become more general, or the specific nature of this thread will be lost. TY!
It occurs to me that the tp fee + jobs proposal is like the introduction of a guaranteed basic income. It is not quite unconditional as in the UBI in that it requires 30 mins of work a day in order to get 5 peds of income a day.
For those that tp less than 5 times a day there would be income as a result of the 30 mins. It is likely to be a higher income than from the big field of sweating for many more hours.
After a year, it is planned that people can work for a higher hourly wage.
I assume the average player tps maybe 5 times a day, so in this respect it is economically neutral, but will cost players time if they wish it to be neutral.
However, there will be a cut for the platform and investors, which will have to be paid for by those with higher regular travelling.
In the anti basic income argument the question is posed: who would work if your basic needs were met?
In this scenario it might be: who would still travel around a lot via tp if it cost them to do so?
I've not looked into the speculated tp figures for 2020 mathematically... seems like one heck of an increase though, assuming the 10 million tps per year when free would NOT transfer across 1:1 when fees are charged.
Discuss..... and please keep it on topic to not become more general, or the specific nature of this thread will be lost. TY!