500g + 48 days = 1 Million Gold? (Guide)

How did you get here?

From Gaia Guides & Resources	30.2%	[ 891 ]
A friend linked me.	11.8%	[ 349 ]
I searched some key words and found it.	10.6%	[ 312 ]
Redirection from Teh Hoarding Guild.	1.9%	[ 56 ]
Redirection from Solution to a Problem.	2.6%	[ 78 ]
Redirection from The Profiteers Guild.	2.2%	[ 65 ]
Redirection from The Newbie Support & Training Guild.	0.7%	[ 22 ]
Marketplace link/banner/other advertisement.	9.1%	[ 267 ]
By stalking Jace.	9.1%	[ 267 ]
I have no idea how I got here.	21.7%	[ 640 ]
Total Votes:			[ 2947 ]

[Mizuki Ayu]

Mike 8D

bump

~♥~

Please don't bump, it's against the rules :3
~♥~

[Mizuki Ayu]

Freshboy_92

what?

~♥~

This is a very slow moving forum, unless the thread is off the front page, it doesn't need to be bumped.
~♥~

[Jace Quin]

Freshboy_92

what?

From the Gaia Guides & Resources Subforum Rules and Guidelines:

"Posting Restrictions

Bumping: Gaia Guides & Resources is one of the slowest moving forums in Gaia. A thread may be bumped only when it is no longer on the first page of forum listings."

This thread generally gets posted in often enough that it is rarely off the first page. If you have any questions or suggestions you're welcome to post them but it is probably in your best interests to refrain from bumping.

[little_kiwis2]

Question:
I'm a bit confused about when i should sell an item. Currently, i'm thinking of selling my Shadow Huntress item, since the ABP is up by 2%, but the LBP currently is 255k, which is a bit lower than i'd like to sell. How do I know when i should sell? Should I just swallow my gold-loving pride and sell now, or wait for the LBP to get a bit closet to the AVB?

[Jace Quin]

little_kiwis2

Question:
I'm a bit confused about when i should sell an item. Currently, i'm thinking of selling my Shadow Huntress item, since the ABP is up by 2%, but the LBP currently is 255k, which is a bit lower than i'd like to sell. How do I know when i should sell? Should I just swallow my gold-loving pride and sell now, or wait for the LBP to get a bit closet to the AVB?

You can sell whenever you're happy with the profit. But I don't think you should be concerned that the lowest buy price is higher than the average price.

[King Awesomolocity]

So, Jace....for my Junior research paper that we have to do, I was considering two things...
1. Gaia Economy. (Most interesting to me)
2. Rockefeller. (Rich people are cool)

But, as I was looking up things about rich people, I got sorta curious and decided to look up on that "rich people should pay more taxes" thing that Obama started.
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on that?

~King Awesome

[Jace Quin]

King Awesomolocity

So, Jace....for my Junior research paper that we have to do, I was considering two things...
1. Gaia Economy. (Most interesting to me)
2. Rockefeller. (Rich people are cool)

But, as I was looking up things about rich people, I got sorta curious and decided to look up on that "rich people should pay more taxes" thing that Obama started.
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on that?

~King Awesome

One of the arguments against raising taxes on the rich I hear the GOP (why do they call Republicans the Grand Old Party I don't know?) use is that a very small percentage of the richest people pay half the taxes in this country (their point being that they already pay enough taxes). But really that argument really just highlights how much more money they have than the vast majority of the country. Then there's the fact that many rich people end up paying a lower percentage of tax than many much less rich people. Mitt Romney, for example, paid something like 11% in taxes during a two year period when he made 14 million dollars. I made ~12,000 dollars a couple years ago and paid ~1,200 in taxes which works out to an easy 10% but 10% of my 12,000 dollars was worth a whole lot more to me than 11% or 30% of 14 million would have been to him. I generally think they can afford to pay more taxes so it makes sense that they should.

Which is not to say that I think they should pay more taxes so we can expand entitlement programs or continue going to war. I think that able-bodied people receiving unemployment or welfare benefits should be required to do something to earn them. I mean, obviously they need 'time to find new jobs' but I think 15-20 hours a week of shoveling snow off sidewalks or picking up trash in parks might encourage them to find jobs instead of collecting unemployment/welfare. I think that the Department of Defense should actually focus on defending the country instead of being a cover for 'all that money we spend killing people'. I think people should get to decide where at least 50% of their tax money goes. I think people should have the opportunity to opt out of so-called 'social security'. I will promise to never collect social security if you allow me to invest that money on my own instead of throwing it into the gaping black hole of social security. I think we should reduce the size of government, not give tax breaks to companies taking jobs overseas, not allow states to give tax breaks to companies bringing 'new' jobs from another state, and legalize and tax marijuana. I think that 'public servants' should serve the public. I think the 'congressional oversight committee' should not be made up of members of congress. I don't think rich people should go into government to get richer. The united states has been applauding China for beginning to clean up bribery and corruption when in reality political figures in our country get just as much if not more grist and feel entitled to it because they are 'public servants'. Those are just a few of the things I'd do along with raising taxes on the rich. Based on my voting history some people would peg me as a 'democrat' and other people as a 'republican' but I am a proudly 'unenrolled' voter (which means I am a true independent and not 'green party'). On facebook under political affiliation I put 'logic'. If we ran the country like a business or at least according to the dictates of logic we'd be out of debt in no time and on the path to eliminating dependence on non-renewable energy to boot.

Uhm, I realize I went on for a while. But you can ask whatever about whatever. I personally prefer Gaia Economy over Rockefeller, though.

[King Awesomolocity]

Jace Quin

King Awesomolocity

So, Jace....for my Junior research paper that we have to do, I was considering two things...
1. Gaia Economy. (Most interesting to me)
2. Rockefeller. (Rich people are cool)

But, as I was looking up things about rich people, I got sorta curious and decided to look up on that "rich people should pay more taxes" thing that Obama started.
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on that?

~King Awesome

Uhm, I realize I went on for a while. But you can ask whatever about whatever. I personally prefer Gaia Economy over Rockefeller, though.

See, I was liking the idea of like...a flat rate income tax across everyone. However much that would be, everyone pays that percentage. And that was one of the arguments that I found online. Rich people would pay more money, but it would be the same rate, which seems more fair, in my opinion. I actually haven't had to live on my own and pay taxes yet, so I don't know, but...it sounds like a more fair way of doing things.

As for the government spending, one of the things that irritates me the most is one of the things that the government always complains about is kids becoming less intelligent in school, but one of their default tax cuts is...cut education spending. It's stupid. And some people bring up the argument that the US spends more on education that other countries...but the amount we pay per student is less...I think. I haven't looked that up, but it seems to be so.

And another thing that bugs me is seeing our state workers doing anything.
1 guy digs a hole, 7 people watch. They're all getting paid. I think most things that the state does can be done better and cheaper by private business. A lot of projects should be outsourced to private business. Helps the private sector get more money; helps the government save more money; helps tax payers save money; helps just about everyone.

Edit: And yes. I decided on the Gaia economy. I didn't actually think about doing it until I was posting here, so that's why I was going to do Rockefeller. xd

~King Awesome

[Jace Quin]

King Awesomolocity

Jace Quin

King Awesomolocity

So, Jace....for my Junior research paper that we have to do, I was considering two things...
1. Gaia Economy. (Most interesting to me)
2. Rockefeller. (Rich people are cool)

But, as I was looking up things about rich people, I got sorta curious and decided to look up on that "rich people should pay more taxes" thing that Obama started.
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on that?

~King Awesome

Uhm, I realize I went on for a while. But you can ask whatever about whatever. I personally prefer Gaia Economy over Rockefeller, though.

See, I was liking the idea of like...a flat rate income tax across everyone. However much that would be, everyone pays that percentage. And that was one of the arguments that I found online. Rich people would pay more money, but it would be the same rate, which seems more fair, in my opinion. I actually haven't had to live on my own and pay taxes yet, so I don't know, but...it sounds like a more fair way of doing things.

As for the government spending, one of the things that irritates me the most is one of the things that the government always complains about is kids becoming less intelligent in school, but one of their default tax cuts is...cut education spending. It's stupid. And some people bring up the argument that the US spends more on education that other countries...but the amount we pay per student is less...I think. I haven't looked that up, but it seems to be so.

And another thing that bugs me is seeing our state workers doing anything.
1 guy digs a hole, 7 people watch. They're all getting paid. I think most things that the state does can be done better and cheaper by private business. A lot of projects should be outsourced to private business. Helps the private sector get more money; helps the government save more money; helps tax payers save money; helps just about everyone.

~King Awesome

I mean, on the surface it sounds nice and fair but in reality it isn't really. Let's say you made 20,000 dollars in 2012. This is, keep in mind, a couple thousand dollars above the poverty line. I personally have never made that much money. 12,000 is about as much as I've ever made in a year living on my own and I've managed to pay for food, shelter, entertainment and even saved some money (one of the huge reasons I have substantially less liberal views of welfare than I did as a highschooler). I didn't need a credit card nor did I receive any sort of monetary support from my parents and neither did I get any sort of support from the welfare system.

So if you made 20,000 in 2012 you fell into the 15% tax bracket. So you paid in about 3,000 dollars in taxes and ended up with 17,000 in take home pay.
Now let's say some other dude made 1,000,000 in 2012. He falls into the highest tax bracket of 35%. He pays 350,000 in taxes and takes home 650,000.
At a glance this seems grossly unfair. Obviously the millionaire paid a whole lot more in taxes than you did at just above the poverty line.
But let's consider your bracketless tax scenario for a moment. You have to pick a percentage that seems fair. Average per capita personal income was, let's say, about 42,000 dollars last year which would ordinarily fall into the 25% bracket. A quarter of everyone's income should seem fair, right? So at 20,000 dollars you pay 5,000 dollars in taxes and the millionaire pays 250,000 dollars. So your taxes went up by 2,000 dollars and his went down by 100,000. But at least it's 'fair' right? But you have to consider the fact that even though the millionaire lives in a nice house and eats expensive dinners he still pays a much smaller percentage of his income on food and shelter than you do. He also saves a much higher percentage of his income than you do (if, indeed, you save anything at all). If you spend 7,800 a year on rent (which is relatively decent for an apartment in my area), and 6,000 on food that leaves you just 1,200 to spend on anything else you might need or want. The millionaire on the other hand has a house worth a few million dollars and let's say he's a pretty modest millionaire and pays 36,000 dollars a year on his mortage and let's say he eats fancy dinners all the time and also spends 36,000 a month on food. So you pay 69% of your 20,000 dollars on just food and shelter while the millionaire spends just .07% of his income on food and shelter.
But since you might argue that 25% of everyone's income does seem grossly unfair to the really poor let's say everyone who makes under 10,000 a year pays no income tax (much like we do now). That gives the poor an incentive to... stay poor. I got a raise after working at my new job for four months. If we were in the flat-rate scenario there would have been negative incentive for me to take the raise. I could have quickly calculated that a fifty cent raise would put me over 10,000 dollars for this year so it would actually hurt me financially to accept. I might ask them to hold off on giving me a raise until next year when the fifty cent raise would bring my pay up enough above 10,000 to actually be worth it to me.
So do you think it's more fair to pay 15% tax on your 20,000 income and have someone else pay 35 or even 40% on their million dollars when you consider that 69% of your income goes to food and shelter and they pay just .07% of theirs on the same?

I think that education needs to be restructured. The whole concept of a college degree needs to be rethought for one thing. I don't know if we necessarily need to spend more money on it but the system we have in place definitely needs to be changed.

I have never really understood why the people who fix the roads have to be state workers. They'd probably do a better job for a lower price if it was contracted out. We certainly wouldn't be paying for that much 'labor'.

[King Awesomolocity]

Jace Quin

King Awesomolocity

Jace Quin

King Awesomolocity

So, Jace....for my Junior research paper that we have to do, I was considering two things...
1. Gaia Economy. (Most interesting to me)
2. Rockefeller. (Rich people are cool)

But, as I was looking up things about rich people, I got sorta curious and decided to look up on that "rich people should pay more taxes" thing that Obama started.
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on that?

~King Awesome

Uhm, I realize I went on for a while. But you can ask whatever about whatever. I personally prefer Gaia Economy over Rockefeller, though.

See, I was liking the idea of like...a flat rate income tax across everyone. However much that would be, everyone pays that percentage. And that was one of the arguments that I found online. Rich people would pay more money, but it would be the same rate, which seems more fair, in my opinion. I actually haven't had to live on my own and pay taxes yet, so I don't know, but...it sounds like a more fair way of doing things.

As for the government spending, one of the things that irritates me the most is one of the things that the government always complains about is kids becoming less intelligent in school, but one of their default tax cuts is...cut education spending. It's stupid. And some people bring up the argument that the US spends more on education that other countries...but the amount we pay per student is less...I think. I haven't looked that up, but it seems to be so.

And another thing that bugs me is seeing our state workers doing anything.
1 guy digs a hole, 7 people watch. They're all getting paid. I think most things that the state does can be done better and cheaper by private business. A lot of projects should be outsourced to private business. Helps the private sector get more money; helps the government save more money; helps tax payers save money; helps just about everyone.

~King Awesome

I mean, on the surface it sounds nice and fair but in reality it isn't really.

I think that education needs to be restructured. The whole concept of a college degree needs to be rethought for one thing. I don't know if we necessarily need to spend more money on it but the system we have in place definitely needs to be changed.

I have never really understood why the people who fix the roads have to be state workers. They'd probably do a better job for a lower price if it was contracted out. We certainly wouldn't be paying for that much 'labor'.

Now that you give me that lengthy example, I see your point. Flat rate sounds less fair, and I've changed opinions again. xD But I can see both sides of the argument.

o.O What do you mean by the college degree thing?
Oh, I agree that we don't need more money, but with the lack of efficiency of the government, more money would help students in the long run. Restructuring it would be a lot better for students and for government.

And not to mention, if the state gets several good, reputable local businesses for their project, they could get bids from all of the companies, meaning an even lower price for better work. The people who own the business will (or should) fire anyone working inefficiently. Because that's business. Government currently doesn't run like business. They act like they have infinite money. :/

~King Awesome

[Jace Quin]

King Awesomolocity

Jace Quin

King Awesomolocity

Jace Quin

King Awesomolocity

So, Jace....for my Junior research paper that we have to do, I was considering two things...
1. Gaia Economy. (Most interesting to me)
2. Rockefeller. (Rich people are cool)

But, as I was looking up things about rich people, I got sorta curious and decided to look up on that "rich people should pay more taxes" thing that Obama started.
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on that?

~King Awesome

Uhm, I realize I went on for a while. But you can ask whatever about whatever. I personally prefer Gaia Economy over Rockefeller, though.

See, I was liking the idea of like...a flat rate income tax across everyone. However much that would be, everyone pays that percentage. And that was one of the arguments that I found online. Rich people would pay more money, but it would be the same rate, which seems more fair, in my opinion. I actually haven't had to live on my own and pay taxes yet, so I don't know, but...it sounds like a more fair way of doing things.

As for the government spending, one of the things that irritates me the most is one of the things that the government always complains about is kids becoming less intelligent in school, but one of their default tax cuts is...cut education spending. It's stupid. And some people bring up the argument that the US spends more on education that other countries...but the amount we pay per student is less...I think. I haven't looked that up, but it seems to be so.

And another thing that bugs me is seeing our state workers doing anything.
1 guy digs a hole, 7 people watch. They're all getting paid. I think most things that the state does can be done better and cheaper by private business. A lot of projects should be outsourced to private business. Helps the private sector get more money; helps the government save more money; helps tax payers save money; helps just about everyone.

~King Awesome

I mean, on the surface it sounds nice and fair but in reality it isn't really.

I think that education needs to be restructured. The whole concept of a college degree needs to be rethought for one thing. I don't know if we necessarily need to spend more money on it but the system we have in place definitely needs to be changed.

I have never really understood why the people who fix the roads have to be state workers. They'd probably do a better job for a lower price if it was contracted out. We certainly wouldn't be paying for that much 'labor'.

Now that you give me that lengthy example, I see your point. Flat rate sounds less fair, and I've changed opinions again. xD But I can see both sides of the argument.

o.O What do you mean by the college degree thing?
Oh, I agree that we don't need more money, but with the lack of efficiency of the government, more money would help students in the long run. Restructuring it would be a lot better for students and for government.

And not to mention, if the state gets several good, reputable local businesses for their project, they could get bids from all of the companies, meaning an even lower price for better work. The people who own the business will (or should) fire anyone working inefficiently. Because that's business. Government currently doesn't run like business. They act like they have infinite money. :/

~King Awesome

Think about it, What is a college degree really? What does it represent? What is its purpose? What value does it have?

[King Awesomolocity]

Jace Quin

Think about it, What is a college degree really? What does it represent? What is its purpose? What value does it have?

Truer words have never been spoken....or typed.

But seriously though. I'm not personally fond of the whole school thing. (Particularly homework, since it's just busy work cutting into free time)
But I love learning. >_<
I have no clue how different college is, but I think it degrees would make more sense if all you had to do was pass a defined test for a subject proving that you know it. Schooling optional, lol.

~King Awesome

[Sayurixchan]

I don't think you can quite give the impression that a degree isn't worth it. There's no way...no way ever you could get a job as a doctor, nurse, etc. without a degree. And now nursing is setting their standards even higher. Associate degree jobs are hardly available as they are starting to only accept bachelors or above. And if you think about it, would you want a doctor/nurse/dentist/whatever practicing just because he thought he knew a lot? Or would you rather them study their asses off, pass with the insanely high required grades to get the degree, pass all their licensing/accrediting exams, plus having a ton of clinical experience?

Don't get me wrong though...there are plenty of lesser degrees that don't mean much.