memes
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
A relevant xkcd bot is really the only AI I want in my life.
Being in jail is actually a good place to be in Monopoly, depending on how few properties aren't owned.
Luxury tax is the fuck you for having a a car tax a lot of towns apply called excise tax.
But you can buy your way out of jail for a relatively tiny amount, so it's still accurate.
It was originally designed to convince people that capitalist greed and acting as a landlord is morally abhorrent and the whole system should be replaced with socialism. The idea was, and I am not joking or exaggerating at all, to play the monopoly you know, and realize that it's the worst game. Then, you play it with slightly different rules that change how land ownership and rent works, and you realize that literally everyone can win, and everyone plays cooperatively.
Then, capitalists saw it, stole the idea, and the original inventor didn't have sufficient money to fight for her exclusive rights, so now we have only the capitalist, rent-seeking shit show of a game that Parker brothers stole.
It's not "monopoly". It's The Landlord's Game.
The rules still allow rich people avoid jail immediately by paying $50.
If you don’t pay you have to roll doubles to get out, but it you don’t roll doubles on the third try, you have to pay the $50 anyway.
Remember, $50 is the cost of a house on side properties.
This is kinda like real life, where you can pay good lawyers and avoid time/conviction, or rot in jail and still owe when you’re released.
And worse, as another pointed out, the rich are actually incentivised to stay in club fed, because their assets can still appreciate, they can still make purchases, and they don't have any risk of having to actually pay anyone else anything.
I wanted to read up on that, because I've never heard it before. And apparently her original patent for landlords game ran out in 1921, and her second patent mostly covered the single tax theory playstyle, which didn't get incorporated into monopoly, because the new patent couldn't include things from the old one.
So while they definitely took her game, and mutilated the concept to promote the thing it was advocating against, they didn't necessarily steal it and abuse the fact that she couldn't afford to fight back (At least from what I've seen, please correct me if I'm wrong)
But if she had had the money for a proper patent lawyer, she could have filed a patent for a sufficiently-changed or better-specified version that would have protected it. Even in cases of patent law, many corporations have managed to hold onto their patents with death grips despite their expiry (Nintendo comes to mind).
Problem was that the second part of the game was terrible at being a game whereas the part we know now as Monopoly was, compared to its contemporary board games, quite good.
But still needs house rules to make it fun to play with friends. Playing from the rulebook is miserable. Side note: it really broke my immersion in A Quiet Place that the kids were quietly playing monopoly together. That's how I knew it was a work of fiction lol
One popular opinion is that it is more fun with the actual rules, it is just difficult to follow the rules, especially the auctions. My computer had monopoly programmed into it when I was growing up and it was a lot of fun playing single player by the actual rules.
The free parking pot I'm kind of ok with, even though it makes the game longer it introduces a little randomness. Otherwise monopoly snowballs pretty fast.
Otherwise monopoly snowballs pretty fast.
That’s the point
Yeah, it was always meant to be a quick game.
Then, capitalists saw it, stole the idea, and the original inventor didn't have sufficient money to fight for her exclusive rights,
And this is why IP law only protects the rich. They're the only people who can afford to sue for it.
Monopoly is a banned game in our family since that incident back on Christmas 1999 when my sister absolutely refused to trade properties with my mom and my mom getting irrationally angry about it to the point of shattering a chair and storming out of the house.
If only real financial inequality made us that upset…
There have been a couple times
That's because it was originally designed to convince people that it was an awful game system. Literally. The point is that it's unfair and you should hate it.
In its pure form, the game it was shamelessly stolen from had a second play style, called "prosperity", which had slightly different ownership and rent rules, and was played cooperatively.
You guys should try the game "diplomacy" then.
One of them might literally commit murder.
and in the game, the wealthy often want to stay in jail so they can stay wealthy. can't land on a square that costs money but you still collect rents, build, and can wheel-and-deal while in there. so jail must be more mayberry pd and less federal pen.
Also, the game was supposed to be teaching everyone why monopolies are terrible, not as a set of goals for the epstein class.
TBF: both rich and poor people pay luxury tax (tobacco, alcohol etc.) - but such taxes always affect low income people more.
Also why fines should always be based on income. A static, $100€ speeding ticket can only keep the poorest in order
Even the countries that do this employ all sorts of edge case rules not to make it too fair.
Well, at least my country does. One of those famous Northern European "Socialist" countries.
Indeed. If the punishment for a crime is a flat fine, then, to the rich, it is not a punishment, but a price
Hardly. If the alcohol tax on a bottle of wine is €5 and the bottle is sold for €10, that's a pretty steep price. If the bottle is sold for €100 or even more, it's nothing.
But I understand that you were probably thinking about companies calculating spending & sales.
What? Tax is not a punishment. If a company finds that they can poison the environment and release PFAS into a local stream, but that they will be charged $12000 if they're caught, then all they have learned is that, for the potential price of $12000, they can purchase the right to not have to follow environmental regulation (and they'll only have to pay it if they're caught!)
Tax is not a punishment.
Are you replying to the wrong person? I specifically pointed out that they were thinking about something else.
I was originally replying to the person who pointed out that flat fines are worthless. The luxury tax bit is irrelevant to what i was saying. My reply to you was trying to figure out why you were bringing luxury tax back into it, when the specific thing to which I was replying was about flat fines as a punishment. I still don't know what the heck you meant by "hardly"
And the person winning can have family members take their place, while others have to start from scratch. Or is it only the real world that's so ridiculous?
You're insane if you want to tax the new, rich players...
Nah, it was always a fantasy game.