Vortex works great. In general, you’ll want to use some kind of mod manager and in the Skyrim realm, the main alternative to Vortex is Mod Organizer 2. I have heard that there are some exceptionally fiddly setups for which Mod Organizer is the better choice, but Vortex is a very good one. Much better than the old Nexus Mod Manager.

Installing them yourself is basically irreversible, and things can get complicated if you don’t have a mod manager keeping track of stuff.

Sweet.

What is this an excerpt from?

No, show her your Bionicle collection.

You don’t need to adjust for income. How do you get high value land with a low income? How do you own high value land and not derive an income from it? You’re imagining an extreme edge case of some family that’s been passing high value land down, generation after generation, without ever leveraging this advantage into financial success.

The more valuable the property, the larger a component of that value that tends to be in the value of the location itself, as opposed to the capital improvements to that location. Low income housing, as cheaply built as it is, is built in an even cheaper location. Conversely, a house but for higher income people is built more expensively, but even greater is the access to good schools, jobs, shopping, low (blue collar) crime rates, and so on that a high value location provides.

And that’s just residential real estate, which is almost people even think about. With commercial and industrial sites, location becomes even more important.

People who talk this way don’t know what land value is. They imagine there is a relationship to quantity, when location is almost the entire driver. Maybe a thousand square feet of space in upper Manhattan or San Jose or something is comparable to a hundred acres in rural Wyoming, or wherever.

And what about the poor in cities? They already pay a land value tax… to the owners of the land. You will say that if the owners are taxed, they will raise rents… but if they can just raise rents like that, why haven’t they already? Normally, a tax can be “passed on” because a tax on a thing affects the supply of that thing: the tax raises costs, which lowers profits, which drives capital out of that industry and into another, which reduces the amount being produced, which allows the higher price.

But land is fixed in supply. If you’re imagining a way of increasing or reducing the supply, you’re not thinking about land, but capital improvement to it. The supply can be neither increased nor decreased. Its existence is not dependent on any industry or thrift or other service on the part of the landowner and, as such, any income derived simply from owning a location and leasing it out to others is unearned. It’s essentially extortion, one person renting to another the “privilege” of existing, and if there are any landowners not collecting the full value that can be collected, it is either because they haven’t found the highest price yet, or out of the kindness of their hearts.

Empty housing is empty land. It just has a house on it. And there are times and places where landowners will spend decades sitting on infill waiting for land values to go up. Additionally, land that could be developed into high density housing but is being held at low density at the behest of the area’s politically connected residents, is kind of like “empty” land. It isn’t a binary.

Land value taxation is inherently progressive. That’s probably why it’s never been implemented.

“Income tax on their properties whether they’re rented or not” is just a long way of saying “land value taxation”.

Re: Username: I’m not sure I want to see your planet’s fjords.

You could even do something like snap your finger in the middle of your field of vision, and then use your hand as an interface.

In fact, the only way that you could pray to make impression,
On the era ahead is that instead of being notable,
You make the data describing you undecodable.

MC Frontalot, “Secrets From the Future”

It’s like we turn into that old person that goes into their entire medical history when asked this question.

When money is loaned into existence, both the supply and the demand are created at the same time. When there are real investment opportunities (opportunities to make money by expanding production and improving productivity) allowing the money supply to expand makes it easier for expansion to occur. The problem is when such opportunities are thinned out, and people just start rent seeking for want of real investment opportunities. At this point cheap credit fuels not expansion, but just pushes up prices of existing resources and facilitates the transfer of wealth into the hands of people that already have wealth to use as collateral.

Your suggestion would create a money supply that was fixed until and unless whoever happened to be in control of the central bank for whatever political reason decides to expand it. It also has no means of contracting the money supply, not as stated. The current systems relies on financial institutions presumably needing to be paid back, and thus generally issuing loans when repayment looks likely (which will sometimes be a good business plan). This keeps the decision as close to the business reality as you can, making borrowers and lenders the eyes and ears of the system. Centralize that, and you cut off an enormous supply of information, information absolutely necessary to make these decisions.

Personally, I think the problem with the current system isn’t a banking problem, but a problem of rent seeking opportunities just being left out there to serve as sources of private revenue. It’s the equivalent of selling tax farming contracts but then letting the taxman keep everything they take. Start treating them as sources of public revenue (start with land value taxation), and you won’t have banks making loans for non productive “investments”. Without these opportunities, there would be no basis to continue making loans when there aren’t any real investment opportunities to put that money into. The credit supply would naturally wax and wane with the rest of the economy.

I don’t know a lot of them, mostly just a set of Star Trek ones I heard on Doctor Demento decades ago. But recently I have enjoyed Aurelio Voltaire’s “USS Make Shit Up”.

You might consider avoiding the situation entirely, at least while they’re still too young to understand how to accommodate people. Was there some particular reason your outing needed to be in a space where supervision needed to be constantly immediate? Consider the park, a playground, somewhere w little rough and tumble is expected where you can withdraw into your mind a bit as necessary, where the only source of light is the sun, and sounds don’t echo off walls and stuff. A nice open space where you can sit, and they can run.

I once saw a video talking about how the katana isn’t the right sword to compare with a longsword. Longsword was a battlefield weapon; katana was more of a decorative sidearm. Kind of like an officer’s sabre. Another weapon, called a “tachi” if I recall correctly, was more common in an earlier era when Samurai spent far more time on actual battlefields. It was a longer and heavier blade.

That sounds more like post-post-post-Roddenberry Trek.

Gene Roddenberry: We’re headed for some bleak imperialist nonsense, but don’t worry, it’ll get better.

You’re assuming marginal cash has the same value for everyone. It doesn’t. Losing 20% at the top bracket might barely be felt. Maybe can’t buy quite as many classic cars for the collection, or can only have eight yahts, instead of nine. But at the bottom, that 20% can mean the difference between being able to make rent and ending up homeless, or between being able to pay the power bill or not. It can be the difference between having to get a payday loan or not (and thus cause a loss of considerably more than 20%).

Look up the term “marginal utility” for an academic treatment of the subject.

Every fantasy author (except Tolkien): We’re headed for some bleak imperialist nonsense, but humanity’s salvation will come from an individual or small group who will save the world through the judicious application of violence.

How do we conclude that inflation is wage driven when inflation consistently outpaces wages?

Sometimes search is just buggy. I had the same problem when I first started: couldn’t access certain communities from my instance until one day, I just could, for no particular reason I could see.