I already have dingbat. It is not my problem you don’t grasp national income accounting nor arithmetic. Go reread my simple example and try to do so with open mind.
1 Like
Yeah, pretty much what I expected.
Denial and not one step back until death, eh?
Cant ever be wrong, right?
“national income accounting” was particularly funny in this context.
Did you make that up just now? Are Goons now a nation?
Explain/show us how you come to the conclusion that Goons have paid out 227trillion isk to “mostly” non-Goon/non-Delve player wallets in the last 3 months, which directly matches Delve (Goons) import value.
I explained the reasoning and why your interpretation leads either to things like double counting or under counting economic activity. You ignored my comments. So I have nothing left if you refuse to acknowledge those. Jesus you need help.
Dear Mr. Goon Economist,
Have Goons paid 277trillion in isk to non-Goon wallets, as matches the import value to Delve, in the last 3 months, as was your claim in OP?
Yes or no.
PS: I dont need help from Jesus. I just want an answer from you,
This sounds a bit like tickle down - give to the rich and they will reinvest it into the economy through jobs - with a float up hypothesis - give the economic lower and the market is going to float up the money to the economic higher suppliers.
Afaik this is how I read it.
Yes. I have explained it already.
Can net imports reduce GDP? IRL?
The quick answer is, “Yes,” and in looking at the GDP identity yeah it looks that way,
GDP = Consumption + Investment + Gov. Spending - (Imports - Exports).
If imports are greater than exports then the last term in parentheses is negative. But this literal meaning fails to consider why the equation is set up this way. Ideally we’d measure the following list:
- Domestic consumption
- Domestic Investment
- Domestic government spending
But we can’t, or it is very complicated trying to figure it out. So instead we measure
- Domestic consumption + domestic consumption of foreign goods.
- Domestic investment + foreign investment.
- Domestic Gov. Spending + Gov. Spending on foreign goods.
And then in the end we subtract off Imports less Exports which gets us back to:
- Domestic consumption
- Domestic Investment
- Domestic government spending
in total. So in this sense imports can never reduce Gross Domestic Product. This is not a “Goon” thing it is an economics thing.
The OECD’s misleading statements can be explained by an elementary accounting error, as shown in any good macroeconomics textbook or other explanation, By definition, GDP is made of domestically-produced goods for consumption, investment, government expenditures, and exports, that is, C+I+G+X. When they actually measure GDP, however, statisticians only find a C, an I, and a G that include imported goods and services. In order to correct for that, they have to remove all imports from the formula, which becomes the familiar C+I+G+X-M, where M represents imports. Compounding the error, the formula is usually written as C+I+G+(X-M), where (X-M) is labelled “net exports,” a subliminal version of the trade balance. It looks as if imports subtract from GDP while, in fact, M is subtracted only because it was already hidden in the available data. “Net exports” do not enter in the definition of GDP.
In other words, the impression that imports can reduce GDP is an artifact of methodology. But the methodology is set up to try and capture GDP correctly.
Now, if the final value of a product is used in the accounting in the MERs it is not counting things correctly, IMO. It woud be like counting when trying to count GDP you count consumption, investment and government spending and ignore the effects of imports–i.e. your GDP number is too highg. You are correct then that what Goons are paying and what shows up in the MERs is not the same…because the MERs are wrong. In which case their value goes down. They are misleading you in key measures.
I gave you example, quoted below which you totally ignored.
We have two regaions, One and Two.
In Region One we have some guys who produce 100 ISK worth of raw inputs. Then along comes a Goon who pays those guys 100 ISK and combines the inputs into an in game item worth 150 ISK. Right? So far so Good?
Now that Goon says, “I have to move this to region Two where we live for reasons.” So your assertion is that once this happens 150 ISK worth of value leaves One and moves into Two, right? Okay so lets break down One…
100 + 50 = 150 and then 150 - 150 = 0. Region One has nothing to show for this. Right? But wait. Those guys…the dudes who produced the raw inputs they still have 100 ISK in their wallet. So…something is wrong.
I set up this example so that we could have a frame work to try and reach some common understanding. You refused to engage it…which means you do not want to find common ground or have a reasonable discussion. You are being an obstinate ass. So, this is it. Unless you want to try and have a discussion to reach common ground/understanding I’m done.
As for Zluq, she is beyond help.
It was a bit of rhetoric not a literal endorsement of trickle down economics which actually is foolish IRL. Besides if you can’t pile up ISK in this game…you are kind of doing it wrong. The point is that yes Goons are making lots of ISK and harvesting lots of resources, but they are not just sitting on that ISK. They are buying stuff with it which in turn helps out non-Goons too. Trade is mutually beneficial, else why do it? You always have the right to not enter into the transaction if you do not like the terms. If you have something and a Goon, with his wallet fat from ratting says, “I’ll give you 500,000 ISK for it,” yet it is selling for 750,000 ISK you don’t have to sell to him. And chances are the Goon is just going to go to the market and pay 750,000 ISK, after all his wallet is fat from ratting.
Well it might need some lawfull steerig through a government preventing from - what not entirely right still know to happen as Slavos posited - with screwing each other over through cartels and monopols.
(See history of spice trading and how merchant houses controlled the market.)
I have to say that personally the goon is going to spend 750k instead of 500k on market due to fat wallet is also to an extend optimistic in my book. At least contra my understanding of the homo oeconomicus.
The math is understandable yet to me personally are only going to work if 100 isk bought and refined through production are going to end up as a object market wise more worth, consider that the worth of goods in eve is Station market and thus Region dependant.
What changes is a good called currency and that is what I assume get’s forgotten that currency is a good of it’s own s small scale modell which interprets currency as akin to economic blood plates (they Transport oxygen, and the studs of the System produce them the bones) and thus money transports value. However money had to be reabsorbed by the economy to follow the allegory.
a)No idea perhaps someday someone puts GDP and foreign exchanges together and calculates the Outcome.
b)Plex is also a currency imho which is bought for a currency and can be used to Exchange to a currency, and basicly eve lives from buffered foreign exchange. perhaps someone finds a Business where one can by US currency that can be exchanged into Greencard or Dollar,
Yes, you were, very idealistically. Don’t call it trade if you don’t want to, but don’t deny the reality that, whatever you want to label the phenomenon, “unfair distributions of material wealth” are exactly what some “traders” are trying to achieve.
2 Likes
I did not find any definition of trade where the sole objective was to cause damage to the trade partner.
Usually, thats known as a scam.
1 Like
No TRUE scammer has the intent to do harm. He just wants everything you have for free. Causing injury is not the intent.
Am I doing this right?
2 Likes
I have no idea what it is you are doing,
As usual.
a base definition of trade is
Trade involves the transfer of goods or services from one person or entity to another, often in exchange for money. A network that allows trade is called a market.
and for scam
A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence game, confidence scheme, ripoff, scam and stratagem) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence, used in the classical sense of trust. Confidence tricks exploit characteristics of the human psyche, such as credulity, naïveté, compassion, vanity, irresponsibility, and greed.
1 Like
All scam is theft.
All theft is trade.
Not all trade is theft.
Not all theft is scam.
Would you like to play a game?
1 Like
This is true of everyone that has ever bought anything from the market, ever.
You still havent shown how Goons have actually PAID OUT 227trillion isk to non-Goons/non-Delve wallets in the last 3 months as was your claim in OP, which exactly matches the Delve import stat.
227trillion import value does not mean they paid out 227trillion isk outside Delve.
It simply means they brought in goods worth 227trillion on the average index.
1 Like
For example:
I run Salvos Group, a coalition of various corps that are by far the largest employer and land rights owner in Finland. We own multiple shipyards, armaments factories etc and just about everyone in Finland works for us, or with us.
But we need more resources than we can source locally in Finland. Fortunately, we also have the capacity to generate huge amounts of cash.
So Salvos Group sets up subsidiaries in nearby Russia and Estonia. We build manufacture/processing plants there, and send our employees out to bring resources wherever they can find them into them.
Primarily, we prefer to buy these resources/products from our own employees, and infact insist they sell them to us first, before considering putting them on the open market (as they are our employees).
Ofc, we also buy up cheap resources from competitors, when they become available, as paid for from a discretionary fund.
We then compress/manufacture these into formats that take less space to transport, so we can optimize our logistics train, as well as more efficiently provide security for their transit.
We also prefer to pre-fabricate these materials locally, in Russia and Estonia, in our own facilities, as that saves space/time for other manufacture in our facilities in Finland, once the shipments arrive.
So, how much of our cash revenue are we actually paying out to non-Salvos Group members in Russia and Estonia?
- Ideally as little as possible, as we dont want to fund our competitors.
- Because we generate so much cash every month, we want to minimize its introduction to the markets, so as to keep inflation down (which would devalue our cash stockpiles).
- We prefer to buy from our own sourcers/employees, so as to “keep the money in the family” so to speak. We pay them a premium, so they dont sell them to our competitors instead,
- We do our own pre-fabrication, so we dont have to pay anyone else in Russia/Estonia for that, and we provide our own logistics for the same reason.
The result is that we pay as little cash to non-Salvos Group members as possible for materials, do our own pre-fabrication and our own security.
So when the monthly economic reports come up, our import to Finland is a large figure. But that is not because we paid that equivalent amount in cash to Russian/Estonian non-Salvos Group entities, its because we generated that added value ourselves, at our own cost to ourselves, abroad, before shipping them home.
The only cash we left in Russia/Estonia, is for the discretionary purchase of raw mats, when we could get them cheap. All other expenditure, we kept in-house.
Our aim is to to spend roughly 68trillion over 3 months on non-Salvos Group sourced raw materials, to the result of an import value of 227trillion isk in value (on global commodity index). The rest of that import stat being via our own in-house generated added value, and materials being bought from our own Salvos Group subsidiary sourcers.
We could conceivably invest more into the discretionary allowance for payments to non-Salvos Group entities for their materials, but we prefer not to fund competitors and want to keep a large reserve of liquid cash for our other projects and to allow our Group flexibility.
Since we are the ones that produce so much cash in Finland, compared to the rest of the world, we might as well hold onto it, especially as inflation is small, to keep substantial advantage over our competitors, whom have smaller and less consolidated cash reserves. Furthermore, since we generate so much cash, if we dump too much on the markets, we devalue our own stockpiles.
Cash is king. We aim to have enough liquidity to be able to overcome any unexpected adversity/complication simply by throwing trillions of isk at it, should worst come to the worst.
Our policy is not to export anything.
Our current and future projects require ALL of our domestic production , and ALL production abroad to be brought home to Finland.
As we have such enormous cash revenue domestically in Finland, we have no need to export anything to generate spare cash from sales abroad to competitors.
scam or fraud (hustled consent), theft (against consent) and trade (with consent) are defined in law.
Yes Poker is fine.
1 Like
Wow thats pretty grim.
Of all the things I’ve ever stolen in my life, I didn’t ever stop to ask for someone’s consent. Of all the things I ever had stolen from me, nobody ever asked me for my opinion on whether they should steal it. Objects simply went from being in the possession of one person to being in the possession of the other. That’s a trade. Action → Response (or lack therof).
If someone ever puts a gun to my head, I will gladly trade away all my belongings to them in order for them to not exercise their ability to pull the trigger. I think that’s a totally fair trade and I would like to pre-emptively support, endorse, and recommend not getting shot by [service provider].
Yeah, right, mark. Sure. Ante up.
Consider this: Trade is the exchange of goods or services, without consent is theft, and without cognizance is scam/fraud.
Business (or trade, as its ancestor), is by and large, the science of screwing the other guy out of money, whilst still maintaining good relations, with a smile.
Business(wo)men, are basically civilized crooks.
Cynical, I know, but that’s what it boils down to.
All is fair in love and war (and business).
There are exceptions, but by and large, the most successful businesses are those that manage either to leverage over, or screw over, as many people as possible (including their customers).
1 Like
Most coalitions, if not all, provide incentives for their in-org suppliers to sell to them first.
Either by offering a good price, or services, or flat out demanding it as a condition of remaining within the org, or all three.
If you are really good at it, and/or have hardcore dedicated members, you can even motivate them to do it of their own free will, as their part in furthering the goals of a greater whole, for free.
As relevant to this thread, the Delve (ie:Goons) import vs export values are vast enough in difference to rationally ascertain whats going on there. They are building/reshipping like mad. Stuff is flooding in, at a rate of 227trillion value in three months, very little is coming out. We also know they are getting fabulously isk rich from bounties. We also know Delve is 100% held by Goons et. affiliates.
As I said before, what Goons are doing in Delve, is by far the most interesting/significant thing happening in EVE meta atm.
The MER figures are so pronounced, the hold of Goons on Delve so complete, and the assumption of all Goon action being rational/efficient so evidenced, that its not difficult to deduce from those whats happening there to a high degree of validity.