Shut off the ISK faucets, turn on recirculation pumps.
A lot of hubaloo is given to ISK faucets and sinks, and there is a way to prevent inflation: Stop Printing new ISK.
Step 1: determine how much ISK is needed to be available in the game, put it in a pool, minus the amount already in the wallets of the players.
Step 2: set up a ratio between all faucets to pay out relative to the amount in the pool. As the pool shrinks, so do the payouts, but relative risk/reward stays the same.
Step 3: The pool is replenished by ISK sinks. NPC corp taxes, repair fees, office rentals, etc… all go back into the pool.
Step 4: Wealth Tax. All liquid ISK in all wallets are subject to a continuous interest rate deducted daily. This would be expressed as a percentage, so the more wealth you have, the more holding it in liquid form costs you. This would also go into replenishing the pool. It would affect all wallets, corp or individual, subscribed or not, no exceptions.
I expect that barter will become a thing, as people seek to secure large wealth in the form of goods rather than liquid ISK. Inflation should be fairly quickly reduced, and replaced with more of a flux value as payouts grow and shrink with the pool.
New players would still have ISK. They don’t need New ISK.
No. And people would still use ISK to facilitate trade. They would store wealth in goods.
I’m not confused.
It also comes with the added benefit that transferring wealth would generate content since you can’t beam over a billion minerals the way you can some ISK. Or I suppose they might all just keep the wealth in Jita forever.
You can try to hoard a lot of liquid ISK, but you will never keep it all. A few percent of the super rich could fill the wallets of a great many space poor.
You will have to explain that complaint. Haulers haul goods, not ISK.
Would be better to just make more sink’s, maybe increase skill book cost’s (bad for newbro’s)
or
more service’s like an NPC ship fitting service where you select your fit you want bought in jita remotely and the npc station charges you a (2-5% fee total cost fee (reduced with Standings) ) to buy it off the market and assemble it for you so you can sit in null use that service then arrange shipping without having to travel to Jita or log on a trading alt.
I regularly have to haul 10, 20 or 100B ISK collaterals. Under your scenario, I would have to turn my PLEX (into which I had turned my liquid ISK to not have to pay taxes) back into ISK in order to haul. Not only does this make hauling utterly annoying and cumbersome, I also lose ISK greater than the rewards. If I do not turn my liquid ISK into PLEX, I also lose ISK greater than the rewards. Hauling became effectively unfeasible. Thank you.
No, you do not need to increase skillbook costs. All you need to do is remove this utterly unnecessary feature that players receive broker fees for their market service. Removing this sink was one of the biggest mistakes.
Making existing sinks bigger, like increasing skill book cost or repair fees, just puts more pressure on those who can afford it least though.
This seems like a problem with taking contracts with margins that are too narrow. Obviously you roll any additional cost into the fee for hauling. This takes a bit more out of those issuing the contracts, but other than the effort of converting ISK to goods and back I don’t see where it would unduly affect a hauler.
Even so, the interest on liquid ISK should not be so great that you can’t keep enough on hand as operating funds. In terms of those who are hoarding wealth, even 100 billion isn’t all that much.
What about a service that bribes Concord (high/low) or the dominant npc faction (null) to tap into their intelligence to see if there is enemy ship’s on the other side of a gate, it would only return a number of ship’s and would have to be an expensive service.
That remote ship fitting from a few posts up.
Or if you bribe concord to shutdown local for a few min maybe (2mil isk per player per minute.) eg: 5 players in local you want to shut it down for 5 minutes = 2x5x5 50mil isk. Probably too expensive but something so powerful shouldn’t be cheap.
Nullsec:
4: You can bribe the dominant faction to setup intelligence block’s so that concord only receive 75% of ship death’s reducing bounty payment by 25%.
You can bribe the dominant faction to send more waves of ship’s to target miner’s mining in the system.
Or you can donate funds to support the dominant faction to increase the difficulty of their site’s maybe more neut towers or e-war.
That’s not how hauling, especially public contracts, works. Contract issuers do not care about the haulers’ issues. They issue and haulers have to deal with the problems. Haulers certainly need a lot, but more problems is definitely not one of these things. Personally, I already only take contracts which pay an appropriate reward for the risked collateral. However, that means that sometimes day pass between contracts. Such contracts appear on irregular and random schedules, which means I could miss out on some if I don’t have the necessary funds ready. But I cannot have the funds ready because otherwise I would lose ISK to taxes in the downtime days.
–
Just suggest what everyone suggests for ratting, for instance: No bounties but tags that you need to collect and send to a low sec Concord station. Can you imagine how much in taxes, broker fees and destroyed values to Tornados on these stations would be sunk? Let alone that it would give newer people and salvagers/Noctis pilots a purpose again. They could collect these tags after your carrier and hand them over to you. A journal like the Mining Ledger keeps track of how much they collect and how much you created so that you can hold them accountable.
For that matter: Blue Loot from W-space should also only be exchangeable for ISK in low sec Concord and faction navy stations. No where else, and certainly not in high sec. That would also deal a bit with the rampant sleeper farming going on in W-space.
With this you would have also created more traffic in low sec and by that more conflict points in low sec to make low sec a bit more alive again.
So long as this results in an ISK payout from NPCs it contributes to inflation. Direct ISK rewards aren’t bad, it’s just that it must be balanced with Sinks or inflation is always going to be a problem.
The good thing with this is that the payouts directly feed into unavoidable sinks, namely the high Concord broker fees and sales taxes as you cannot decrease them with standing. And a portion of these tags would also be lost on the way to these stations due to gate camps, station camps, theft from wrecks or hot drops elsewhere.
Why is it everyone who fancies themselves and economist looks at half of the equation and determines there is a problem. Who are you Donald Trump?
I’ll explain that last sentence.
Trump has determined that the current account deficit is a “problem”. However, he is ignoring the capital account surplus. When it comes to foreign interactions there are two accounts, the capital account which measures goods and services and there is the capital account that measures investments. These two accounts, by definition, must balance to zero. That is the current account is in deficit (surplus) then the capital account must be in surplus (deficit) so that they sum to zero. By definition.
So by focusing on one of these accounts one must ignore the other. It is true that the current account deficit could “cost American jobs” but is is also true that the capital account surplus can create jobs. Thus, by focusing on just half of the “issue” one misses the other half.
When it comes to the money supply in any economy what matters is the growth of the money supply and the growth of the real economy. If the two are largely in balance then the prospect for inflation is small. In fact, “turning off” the ISK sources would likely result in wide spread and substantial deflation which is typically very bad for an economy. Large deflation means that by simply not spending ISK one can earn a large rate of return. Thus consumer spending collapses leading to an economic recession or if bad enough a depression (see for example the Great Depression of the 1930s or the Great Recession of 2007-2009).
All this would so is induce people to move their ISK from their wallets into another asset that is stable and can preserve their ISK. This would likely increase the inflation rate as people would have decreased incentive to keep ISK “safe” in their wallets and out of circulation. A “wealth tax” would push ISK onto the market and keep it circulating thus increasing the inflation rate.
I mean really, what on earth are you thinking Mike?