If SE is taking away my hard work...

[Ferth]

I am not even sure what you are arguing for at this point, but I'd like to point out a few things.

What is fact is, if you take your 10m to 1m, then an item at 10m goes to 5m, you have lost 4m (if this happens to every single item in the game). That is fact, its common Math, fact its common sense, if you cant comprehend that then this is a lost cause because its so common sense that primary school students would understand this.

This isn't a fact. This is a hypothetical, rhetorical situation. Your inference about it is a fact. But then the entire thing will need to actually happen. Until then it's speculation.

You are glossing over one very important point I am trying to make about redenomination. Every argument you've made against it... isn't actually against it. Every single argument occurs in the game economy now, without the redenomination happening.

You continually re-state how a free market works. Over and over again. And then you somehow jump from hypothetical examples of how a free market economy works to redenomination being a loss of wealth. You are making that claim without evidence.

Furthermore, speculating about those prices right now is a useless endeavor.

Right, I guess the whole Stock Market is a complete useless endeavor, no one should predict the future! I am sorry, people do this for a living, people do it all the time with just about everything, people predict, people argue, its massively done in the political system, don't say someone is stupid for doing something that is natural and fine.

Again, this is nothing but rhetoric. Trading in futures is high risk. Because of that it is high reward. But the stock market and the futures market occur in one economy, a constantly shifting economy. The shift from 1.0 to 2.0 is the same as leaving one economy and moving to a completely different one. The only reference we have right now is the old one. Trying to speculate on the 2.0 economy using 1.0 examples would be like trying to use the economy now in 1.0 and trying to compare like items in the real world. You are welcome to do it if you want, hell, it might even work out for you, but it would still be bloody stupid.

None of the arguments you have made work against a redenomination. Not one. Because every single point and example you have used can and does occur in the economy already.

[viion]

I am not even sure what you are arguing for at this point, but I'd like to point out a few things.

This isn't a fact. This is a hypothetical, rhetorical situation. Your inference about it is a fact. But for the entire thing will need to actually happen. Until then it's speculation.

It doesnt have to happen, Math is fact. Let me dumb it down for you.
10 down to 1 is 9 remainder.
10 down to 5 is 5 remainder.
9-5 = 4

4 Is the amount of loss you've endured.

Fact. You cant argue math.

You are repeating the same nonsense over which will make me reply with what I've said countless times on here. Don't argue speculations if you can't handle it. It is very clear you don't like it, so why do it?

Therefore prices in ARR will depend on both A and B. As such these prices may end up above 10% of what they are now for some or even all items, but to say that this is a result of A alone is where your fallacy lies.

To put it simply, if an item balances at 15% of what it is now, the extra 5% is due to B, not A. Whatever caused the price to be 15% would have caused the price to be 150% of what it is now if A wasn't in effect.

You are missing one fundamental problem, if the price goes from 100% to 150% now, it was ORIGINALLY 100%, that would thus mean it would have to first be 1/10 now and go to 150%.

This is wrong when you try state it your way. And you are completely missing the point where what you are saying has zero meaning to my argument.

When we go into ARR, you will have 1m from 10m, and that items priced at 10m may not go down to 1m, but it might end up at 1.5m, this is based on the knowledge that people are willing to spend 150% more for an items original value. Thus when someone trys sells at 1.5m people are having to fork out additional 500k to pay for an item they had enough for previously.

So you need to go earn 500k more gil for an item you used to be able to purchase. You need to earn that back, because you lost it.

If you think about it, you all argue everything will go down equally so it is fair, but then not realise that people will not be purchasing things are 1/10th, infact, you have even said this yourself so I have no idea what you're trying to argue when you just proved me right....

Are we just going to go in circles here? I am repeating myself over and over because for some reason you guys think that general wealth is equal and misunderstand key points I am saying.

The price of an items inflation is to ONLY argue that people will pay inflated prices. Thus counteracts the reduction that will occur at ARR.

We can test this when the game is out, if the pricing of a bunch of items reduce to 1/10th, great, everyone is at the same wealth as before. If the items only go to 1/5th they are half as rich as before, if they go to 1/20th then woo we're richer by a little bit, I can buy 2 items which I could only get 1 before.

Then if you try argue it will take time to stablize, it will, but it will stablize at a much higher rate than 1/10th. If after a month the 5m item goes to 2.5m, you still need to earn back 1.5m in order to buy the item you previously could afford. Inflation in this argument is not about the increase of price, it is about the slowing the rate of which an item decreases because the general wealth will increase to where it becomes affordable again, but not at its 90% reduction.

ps. you're not going to prove me wrong because I can easily prove you wrong... thats how a debate works.

The fact that both of you have to put your opinions in your signature to decorate how you think other people are stupid is just beyond pathetic and I will be happy to leave this until ARR to see how things turned out because I don't feel like trying to have a debate with people who are ego crazies.