Subject: Institutional discussion

From: Xylen <mctupper@h...>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 12:54:06 -0600

After wading thru a lot of action while I was away, I noticed that my
proposal for insititutions passed. Before I start creating all of the
things I was thinking about, I wanted to toss a few ideas out for
discussion. (Gasp-talking about a prop before it's made!). Below are a
few ideas I have for institutions and brief notes on each of them. Feel
free to comment on them individually or in groups.

Hospitals--no other nomic has a hospital that I know of, but a society
needs one. If you are rich or influential, you go there to get better.
If you are poor or unimportant, you go there to die. It can be assumed
that the wealthy have enough money for health care, so they don't
really need a public hospital, but for the poor and destitute there may
be a need. Imagine a player who for whatever reason(s) finds them self
poor and/or unappreciated. This leads to depression and they may
attempt to inflict self injury. A hospital could be used as a mechanism
for an unhealthy/unhappy player to commit suicide and be 'born' again as
a new player with a clean slate.

Banks--Very useful for players to save their money in a tax
shelter before the Tax Man comes. This would allow players to save up
enough points over several weeks to purchase Jewels which are
non-taxable. A player would only be taxed upon the points actually in
their possession. Interest could possibly be paid on savings accounts,
and the interest may be subject to taxation of some form.

Insurance--For some paltry sum (say 10 points) paid every week, a
player would be protected against losing too many points from
potentially unpopular proposals. If a Player would lose a lot of
points the insurance would pay out the damages and the player would not
lose any points. This idea still needs some work, but it may be useful.

Lending--Have a party you want to go to, but no jewels to buy the white
jacket, or maybe you want to host the party of the century but can't
afford it? Take out a loan. Any points gained from proposals would go
to paying of the loan. Social Standing may be affected in a negative
way if you take out a loan, but gains in standing would not be totally
lost.

Military--Nice place to go if you are poor. You can vote and you get a
tax free income while in the military, but you cannot make any
proposals. Good way to pay off loans or save up enough to that
Tetrahedron you have always wanted. The rich, but not influential can
buy a commission, receive no salary, make proposals, vote, but most
importantly gain social standing depending on how long they are in the
military.

Xylen,
Male(?) Pariah

-- 
Hardware: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 11:19:27 +1000

Nice ideas for a whole whack of institutions, however, all of them (with
the possible excpetion of the Bank) could only be instituted by a proposal,
as their special effects change game data in ways not provided for by rule
24.

My only idea for a player-created Institution is a Tote for Stairmaster.

As I envisage it, the Tote would accept point transfers from Players, along
with the name of a Runner. When any Runner reaches the specified floor,
the Tote will transfer all of its Points to the Players who nominated that
Runner, in the ratio of the Points wagered (how the original Tote worked)

This strikes me as fairer than the Bets previously legislated - any
comments before I create it?

Another idea for an Institution would be to host a game of Numfield, as
once discussed in Genomic.

When I have time,

gT

---

From: "Richard S. Holmes" <hrholmes@m...>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:31:04 -0400

Xylen wrote:
> 
> A hospital could be used as a
> mechanism

Hmm, stretching a point a bit here, I think. It might be interesting to
have a "suicide" option, but it doesn't seem to me to require an
institution for it... and linking this to the concept of a hospital is a
bit strained.

A hospital might be a useful institution, though, if there were such
things as disease and injury...

> and the interest may be subject to taxation of some form.

Well, MY real life bank account doesn't shelter me from taxation! But
paying interest to savers is an interesting idea... and so would
charging interest to borrowers... Xylen suggested "Lending" separately,
but it'd make more sense for one institution to do both, using the
savings money for lending and using the interest payments on loans to
cover interest on savings.

> lose any points. This idea still needs some work, but it may be

Yep, this one's worth thinking about...

> importantly gain social standing depending on how long they are in the

Hmm, I'm not sure why inability to make proposals would be the price of
military service. And I don't think I like it... Nomics are built
around proposal-making and I'd be leery of messing with that.

- Doctroid

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:42:26 +1000

>institution for it... and linking this to the concept of a hospital is a

The option to suicide/rebirth is available now - by a Player declaring they
are leaving and then signing up again as a Debutante. Not very
sportsmanlike though, and I believe its a criminal offence in GNomic!

<Banks snipped, see earlier post>

>> lose any points. This idea still needs some work, but it may be

This is actually extremely straightforward - perhaps a Player could sponsor
an Insurance Institution which would act in this way. The problem is then
Insurance Fraud - Insured Players churning out bad proposals to bankrupt
the Institution. Perhaps an Excess is in order, or even a No-Claim Bonus!

<Military - quite silly and snipped>

GT

---

From: "Doctroid " <hrholmes@m...>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 12:25:33 -0000

Proposal 81, stating "Trades to, from and between Institutions are 
exempt from Trade Tax", leads me to raise some questions about 
Institutions and economics in general.

Rule 16 states

Any Player (the Merchant) may Offer a Trade to other Players...

Nothing is said about Trades to, from, or between Institutions. So 
right off the bat I'd say P81 is risible in that as of now, there is
no 
such thing as a Trade Tax on Institutional Trades. What's less clear 
is whether there's such a thing as Institutional Trades.

Rule 24 states

All Institutions automatically accept any transference of currency
or 
other
holdings to them. The description of each Institution must specify 
the
conditions for any transference of currency or other holdings to 
Players or to
other Institutions.

This is where Institutions are permitted to receive or dispense
points. 
However, this still is not a Trade in the Rule 16 sense. The rule 
fails to specify how "currency or other holdings" are to be
transferred 
to an Institution and it leaves it up to the Institution's charter to 
specify how "currency or other holdings" are to be dispensed. 
Perhaps 
the neatest interpretation is that the charter should specify the 
mechanisms for transactions in both directions, although it's not at 
all clear that was the intent of Rule 24.

My tentative conclusions are that (1) transferrals to and from 
Institutions are not Rule 16 Trades (2) therefore such transferrals
are 
not subject to Rule 16 taxes (3) no other Rule seems to require taxes 
on Institutional transferrals (4) the mechanisms for Institutional 
transferrals are not specified by the Rules.

Then the next question is, is the SPLA(T) charter legal? It refers
to 
a transferral to SPLA(T) as a Trade, which I claim it is not, but
aside 
from that bit of nomenclature I don't see any illegalities.

So go to it, Frontier Actuary! May you have much return on your 
investment (although I confess I don't see that you've invested 
anything...)

- D

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 11:27:18 +1000 (EST)

>Institutions and economics in general.

And well raised...

>is whether there's such a thing as Institutional Trades.

Yes indeed, an Institution certainly doesn't fit the definition of a Player
from Rule 0. Although the Definition of the State suggests that it be
treated as a Player for some purposes.

>specify how "currency or other holdings" are to be dispensed.

There are two problems here: the first is that there is no rule to
specifically cover Currency Transfers - rather they are a subset of Trades.
A transfer is a one-way Trade. So that leaves us with the problem of how
does an Institution move currency around. Since the Institutional Charter
is not a Rule as such, the institution's actions have to be subject to the
Rules. But since the Institution is certainly not capable of sending Trade
Offers or replies to the AML, Rule 24 states that they will automatically
accept all transfers (one-way Trades) directed to them. This seems to
imply that this is possible, even though not explicitly stated in Rule 16.

Regarding dispensation of Points, Rule 24 should probably be interpreted
that Institutions can perform Instantaneous transfers, rather than Players
having to accept nonexistent Trade Offers. However I would infer that
those transfers would still fall under the limitations of Rule 16 e.g. they
can't put the institution into debt (as mentioned in the SPLA(T) charter).
Otherwise a Player could set up a temporary institution which would
transfer him 100 points it didn't have and then be disbanded, taking its
debt into a black hole with it.

So the concept of taxes from or between institutions doesn't seem
completely risible.

The only thing not legislated for is a Player requesting Points from an
Institution, but the SPLA(T) charter seems to deal with that contingency OK
(i.e. a Institution won't respond to requests -effectively transfers-
without authorisation from its charter)

>Institutions are not Rule 16 Trades

Not exactly, but still subject to the same red tape.

>(2) therefore such transferrals
>are
>not subject to Rule 16 taxes

I would argue they are, from the red tape argument

(3) no other Rule seems to require taxes
>on Institutional transferrals

'cos the concept of Institutions didn't exist when the tax laws went in......

(4) the mechanisms for Institutional
>transferrals are not specified by the Rules.

Well, umm, they sort of are, Rule 24 says you can specify the transfer in
the charter, presumably subject to the checks and balances of Rule 16

>from that bit of nomenclature I don't see any illegalities.

Perhaps the best solution would be to rewrite the definition of
Institutions and Transfers in Rule 24 so it's clear-cut in one way or
another......

>investment (although I confess I don't see that you've invested

Well my first investment seems to have been taken out as tax ;-(

GT