121–130 of 170 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So tax inheritance?
In the UK pro-inheritance folks like to call it a "death tax" and argue it'll rob people of the ability to pass things along to their children. The debate is caustic and unpleasant to say the least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not so sure that the whole point of monopoly is to be banker and cheat.
I would read his statement slightly different: In that perspective, the actual game is to cheat and not follow the rules. Everybody should do it, but the banker has an advantage. Thus, everybody hates the banker for having an advantage in the actual cheating game. I have to say, it's slightly funny to assume a multiplayer game that is entered by all the players with the clear and open intent to not follow the rules o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it is even pretty much a design principle for newer board games [1]. It started to become popular with games like Settlers of Catan. [1] https://boardgamedesigncourse.com/making-a-comeback/
What is the mechanic in Settlers that enables this? Can't think of anything apart from how resources seems to be unevenly used throughout the game (wood and brick being more sought after early on to build roads and settlements, while iron and grain become more important when cities are built later on).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not so sure that the whole point of monopoly is to be banker and cheat.
I would read his statement slightly different: In that perspective, the actual game is to cheat and not follow the rules. Everybody should do it, but the banker has an advantage. Thus, everybody hates the banker for having an advantage in the actual cheating game. I have to say, it's slightly funny to assume a multiplayer game that is entered by all the players with the clear and open intent to not follow the rules o…
it's great to be honest, the only way we played uno was with cheating (if you got caught, you lost the round tho)
it creates a lot of interesting cross round strategies; if you aren't close to victory in one round for example you can hide a good card and save it up for the round, for example. hiding a card or two would get you to uno quicker, but you'd have to play them at some later point or later ruond, and you couldn't win strictly by hiding because once uno is declared your count is fairly visible. but you can strategize and by deciding which card to drop open up more possibilities for matching your last card.
I suggest everyone should try a evening of full on cheating at a luck based game, it's super fun when everyone else is doing it too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it is even pretty much a design principle for newer board games [1]. It started to become popular with games like Settlers of Catan. [1] https://boardgamedesigncourse.com/making-a-comeback/
What is the mechanic in Settlers that enables this? Can't think of anything apart from how resources seems to be unevenly used throughout the game (wood and brick being more sought after early on to build roads and settlements, while iron and grain become more important when cities are built later on).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Georgism is extremely capitalist, and it is not “tax bad behavior.” Georgism can be summarized as such: A person is entitled to exactly what he or she produces. That’s the purest capitalism I’ve ever heard of. The scent of socialism you get is due to the examination that George provides of “exactly what he or she produces.” Laborers are therefore entitled to all of their wages. Capitalists, who earn money by deployin…
> Landlords, however, earn money by charging for access to something they did not produce Not only did they not produce it, in many places they (or the ancestors they inherited it from) actively stole it from the original inhabitants. e.g. The Inclosure Acts, Colonialism, etc.
If the moral position resonates, take it. If the economic position resonates, take it. If the political one resonates, take it. Each is very convincing by its own merits!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> marketed as a get rich quick scheme I am seeing bus stop ads here in Sydney with a tagline from a BTC exchange saying something like "If you're seeing bitcoin on a billboard, it's time to buy". Now I'm hardly an astute investor but I thought the usual rule is that if your cabbie starts talking about it, it's time to get out of the market.
> Now I'm hardly an astute investor but I thought the usual rule is that if your cabbie starts talking about it, it's time to get out of the market. My stripper friends first started asking me if they should buy cryptocurrencies in 2017. Had you bought btc at the $17k it was priced then, you'd have more than tripled your money in the following four years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a board game where one's advantage doesn't compound, though?
A countervailing pattern I've seen (in games with 3+ players) is that, if one player pulls into a lead, then the other players will start piling on them. Board games like Avalon Hill Civilization, Family Business, Root, etc. -- basically any game where you can choose one of your rivals to attack. Munchkin takes this to the extreme, where someone will perpetually be on the edge of winning and there are a variety of co…
It's very hard as a single player to beat a credit union. So the winning player will want to build some sort of alliance with at least some of the losers to make their coalition weaker, which will pull those players up the ladder and give them a chance, and so on. It creates a mostly good dynamic of cooperation for self-preservation.
In the end, one person wins, but it's often a close race.
(This works best if you play with the same crowd every time, because then people have reason to build trust with each other and won't suddenly default on a huge loan without feeling the consequences of it.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a board game where one's advantage doesn't compound, though?
A countervailing pattern I've seen (in games with 3+ players) is that, if one player pulls into a lead, then the other players will start piling on them. Board games like Avalon Hill Civilization, Family Business, Root, etc. -- basically any game where you can choose one of your rivals to attack. Munchkin takes this to the extreme, where someone will perpetually be on the edge of winning and there are a variety of co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would read his statement slightly different: In that perspective, the actual game is to cheat and not follow the rules. Everybody should do it, but the banker has an advantage. Thus, everybody hates the banker for having an advantage in the actual cheating game. I have to say, it's slightly funny to assume a multiplayer game that is entered by all the players with the clear and open intent to not follow the rules o…
There are several board games that actually have rules that encourage cheating. I specifically remember one where the rule was basically "If you get caught during the turn on which you cheated, you need to pay a minor penalty. If the turn passes before you get caught, then you got away with it."