Gigs Shrugged

One can support minimum wages and still understand that they raise unemployment for those subject to them.  It’s far from settled whether there is a net benefit or not, but it’s pretty much universally accepted that they do raise unemployment.

The easy proof is to consider a minimum wage of $50/hour.  One consequence of this would be the near complete elimination of the entire retail employment sector.  Automatic electronic clerks would be installed at every store to take money.   The budget for technological improvements to self-service retail technology would be huge.

Obviously, employment is decreased as millions of positions are eliminated.  Funding into technology to replace those positions, however, is massively increased.  Engineers enjoy full employment, as do technicians to service these machines.  These increases in high tech employment would not come close to offsetting the massive lower end job losses though.  There would also be massive frictional losses as companies struggle to retool quickly.  In the long run, there may even be a net gain to society, as new technologies to replace human workers are developed.

But one incontrovertible fact remains, the higher minimum wage caused higher unemployment.  Not everyone can be an engineer or a highly skilled worker.  Minimum wages have the strong potential to hurt the very people they are designed to help, eliminating their jobs, replacing them with machines.  Something to consider the next time you pump your own gas (and pay yourself at the pump), use an ATM, or a self-service checkout at the grocery store.

While I’m not the least controversial character, I usually don’t embrace drama for drama’s sake.  I want to post about my recent banning from SLU to clear the air about certain things though.

1. Cris was absolutely justified in banning me.
2. It’s only for a week.
3. The threads were as described, various extremely tasteless “parody threads”.
4. They were just parodies and I don’t really feel that way about any of the attacked groups.

At the time the “stupid libertarian” thread was building up, I was in bed with food poisoning.  This much of it wasn’t Richie’s fault, but it did contribute to me flying off the handle, especially since I still felt pretty awful when I logged on.

As for why I did it, basically see Cale’s thread.  It wasn’t just that a couple people were attacking me, more upsetting was that no one was particularly calling them on it.  Cale sums up the situation nicely and I appreciate her being a rational voice.  It means that much more because I know she rarely agrees with me.  I do enjoy discussing politics with the majority of people on SLU, even if I only rarely get agreement.

See you all in a week or so.

It seems a lot of arguments these days are using the logic, “If it saves one person, then it’s worth it”, where “it” is … pretty much anything.  It doesn’t matter how expensive, draconian, or detrimental “it” is, if it saves just one life then it’s all worth it!

More formally this could be expressed as:

1. X provides benefit Y
2. The value of Y can’t be measured
3. Therefore X is justified no matter what the cost

To make this concrete:

1. Embedded RFID chips can detect kidnapped children in public places
2. The value of a kidnapped child’s life is unmeasurable
3. Therefore mandatory embedding of RFID chips in every child is justified

Or a more mundane example:

1. Corporate charity sponsorship foster consumer goodwill
2. Consumer goodwill is a largely unmeasurable benefit
3. Therefore large charity budgets are justified

And very closely related:

1. Doing Y has a minuscule chance of killing someone
2. The cost of someone dying is unmeasurable
3. Therefore no one should do Y

I don’t believe this logical fallacy has been formally described before.  If it doesn’t have a name, I suggest calling it “Appeal to unmeasurable value”.

In a blog by M Linden, Linden Lab detailed their new openspace “compromise”:

• The price will still go up to $125
• Now you’ll have all kinds of new technical limits

Great.  Perfect “compromise”.  The only people buying this are ones who fail at reading comprehension.

The ad farming policy of Linden Lab is aimed at “network advertising”, that is, pervasive, commercial advertising on the mainland, perpetuated by a small group of “ad barons” that owned hundreds of small parcels.

Somehow the original intent of this policy has been twisted.  Juliett Beaumont reports that her signs protesting the openspace price increase were removed, with the following notice from Harry Linden:

Harry Linden: Hi Juliett, If you are planning to advertise/protest with objects on your land on the mainland please make sure any of the objects comply with the recent mainland advertising policy as stated here: Blog Link

Juliett reports that her signs were removed by Harry, not even returned to lost and found, but deleted.  What I want to know is just exactly how is what amounts to political speech in violation of the ad farming policy?  Is this now a policy that is to be used whenever Linden Lab wants to silence dissent?

The following regions are affected:

• Dagny SW
• Dagny NW
• Dagny SE
• Conway 1
• Conway 2
• Conway 3
• Conway 4
• BoomTchik
• Amira
• Mises North
• Mises South
• Mises East
• Mises West
• Socio
• Brakeman

If you currently rent an Openspace (also called low-prim) sim from me, this information is important to you.

Most of you have probably already heard that Linden Lab is raising the price for Openspaces to $125 per month for wholesale owners like me.  This is for all openspaces, regardless if they were grandfathered before.

There has been a large outcry, and you can vote on this Jira if you want to register your disapproval.

Because of this, effective as of the rent due January 1, All GT openspaces will be at the rate of $135/month USD or 36450 L$/month, and as of July 1, $165/month USD or 44550L$/month.

I strongly encourage all my openspace tenants to consider moving to 1/4th sim products instead.  I can offer 1/4th sim for $100 US/27000L$ a month, 3750 prims.  I may require deposits for tenants that want to remain on openspaces to make sure that no one changes their mind on January 1.

If you do not move out:

The rent you are paying now for November is the same as it was before, and the rent you will pay on December 1 is the same also.  Starting January 1 the higher rate will take effect.

Linden Lab either is extremely smart, and has a plan and ulterior motives, or they are very short sighted and really are just making this stuff up as they go along.

Humps made an excellent post on SLU:

A few months back, (or however long it is since LL announced their new openspace policy/pricing), LL in one fell swoop almost ruined Sarah’s business along with many other landlords/estate owners. Who in their right mind would want to rent a quarter sim, with neighbours when for the same tier they could have an entire sim with privacy and the same prim count. Back then Sarah and her peers were justifiably annoyed. FUCK YOU said LL. This is how it is going to be….get on with it.

So ever resourceful, Sarah (along with many of her peers) completely altered their business model. Converting full islands into open spaces and buying new ones in order that they could salvage their business in some form or another. LL could not fail to recognise what was happening. It was after all the only viable thing for estate owners to do, or be left with empty regions which still need to be paid for every month. I would go so far as to say that LL actively encouraged this as the way forward for estate owners. They even brought in additional, new measures to help facilitate this… i.e. the transfer owner to payer option.

For them to turn around now and say that ANYONE abused the situation is a second FUCK YOU from LL. They have happily taken the orders (and the fee’s), happily taken the tier every month, so to say they were unaware of the problem this might cause down the road is simply naive. At best it is rank opportunism on their part.

The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered. -Thomas Jefferson

Linden Lab Raises Openspace Island Prices With No Grandfathering

I think you could make a pretty compelling legal argument that there is a tortuous injury here.

The right to use a Second Life region is an asset. It’s a limited license right that can be transferred, subleased, and generally has value as an intangible asset. If Linden Lab damages the value of that asset for their own gain, then it seems to me you could pretty easily sue to recover the damages. Your intangible asset was impaired by the actions of another.  Linden Lab can reasonably foresee that raising the price of OpenSpace regions from $75/month to $125/month will damage those who invested in the up front fee to acquire these limited license rights to access Linden Lab servers.

Something to think about, especially if you are Linden Lab.

Massively has other coverage of the story.