bring your memberships down

Nonsense.

Before the internet, chess was played quasi-exclusively in clubs.

The price of a club subscription then, or now, is maybe a tad less than a chess.com subscription, but not that much, and chess.com is available more often than four hours a week.

I have never heard anyone complaining the subscription at my club was too high.

Plus, add that you can be on chess.com for free. If suddenly they decided to make the website premium-or-nothing, I would probably go.

Now, maybe I am wrong, chess was a rich man's game back then, and since the internet, the People (tm) has taken power. But I am not convinced, when the alternate hypothesis is that complaining behind the screen is easier and needs less thinking than for real.

Its so expensive... :( 

If they make a half price for studentes and retirees... but they dont...

It was a restaurant in Central Florida, $6 million dollars a year in sales.

It was over 15 years ago, long out of business.

What kind of info would you like? We had, during season, an hourly staff of about 120 and a management staff of 5 under me. Out of season we would drop to about 90 hourly staff and 4 managers under me.

The other corporation is the worlds largest restaurant Point of Sale company in the world with (when I worked for them) sales of just under $900 million a year. They are now over $1 billion a year in sales.

BUT ITS NOT! it is absolutly FREE... that is what lots of people have been trying to say...

If only it were that easy! 

That may be what he wished to talk about, but not I. I do not think it is possible to satisfy "the business of economics" with just a message board post. 

Chess.com is a business, and they can put whatever price point they want on their products. I'm not gonna call them unethical. If you buy their services, you advocate their practices. If you do not, or give your money to a competitor, you do not. They could care less and so do I. They are just one business in an ocean of an immoral economy. 

I'm not claiming I have a better system, but it surely does not hurt to be open to new ideas or welcoming of change which could be for the better. In the year 1000, feudalism was the prevalent economic system. And thankfully too, since it lended its structure to the beautiful chess pieces we enjoy. But I'm sure people of the time recognized it wasn't perfect or fair, but shrugged their shoulders, and said "it works." Kind of like we do nowadays. Not that I am saying capitalism = feudalism. 

I'm just saying whether you admit it or not, it is a moral issue. Point in case: you assumed wrong. I do not make enough money to meet my living expenses. I am an American, I work full time. But I rarely can afford to eat 3 meals a day, many days it is only one. My housing situation, I am sure, is also worse than yours. And my free time, instead of puting myself ahead with a part time job, is donated to animal resuce where I help literally save the lives of animals that would otherwise be put down. All that said, I am not perfect, and I do not mean to give you that impression. I'm just saying the very fact that economic disparity exists between us, IMO proves that it is a moral dilemna. Whether you care to put yourself in other's shoes and look it this way, is up to you. 

hey not my fault if you cant make the connections puppet. Not my fault if you are desensitised. 

Snowden was created by the govt. He's not real...don't you see man! It's a cover up! 

It is NOT a moral dilemna that there is economic disparity.

That is a utopian thought process. 

The moral dilemna is people thinking that those that earn more should have their extra taken away and given to those that don't have as much

You have the ability to improve your lot in life.

When i was growing up we were poor. My mother and father qualified for assistance and never took anything. We struggled sometimes. I can rememebr getting clothes from gargae sales for school. Those were my "new" school clothes.

My mother and father taught me to strive to be the best and not ask for handouts from others.

When my wife and I got married, we had little. I was making 7.50/hour (minimum wage at the time was 4.25/hour, I started working at 3.35/hour) We got by and worked hard. We did better. Then we had kids. We kept working hard and improved our lot in life. (She also came from a poor family.) We eventually got to a point were we had a good life.

Six years ago she lost her job with Ford Motor. We suddenly had our household income slashed in half - literally in half, bringing home 50% of what we brought in the year before.

We didn't complain, we cut back, we tightened our belt. We made do with less. We are now back to ALMOST where we were before. But along the way we also paid off our home mortgage.

"B-b-b-b-but how on earth could you do that with half you income???"

Because we have our priorities. I did not pay for a chess.com memebrship when I first joined. I did not plkay a lot but I used the other things. I didn;t complain that I couldn't afford a memebership, I was thankful that chees.com offered free stuff.

The fact is, if you aren't happy with what you have, you'll never be happy with what you get.

I also put myself in others shoes, HUMANS shoes, ones that have less than me. Ones that have no clean water to drink, ones that don't have enough to eat. Ones that are caught in human trafficking. It is easy for you to claim moral superiority when you have no clue how I live my life. 

(P.S., I never said [or assumed] you had more than you need to live. It was an illustration on how easy it is to claim someone is morally wrong. YOU Ass-u-med I thought you made more than you do. And just because you CHOOSE to not work an extra job and not have enough to feed yourself, don't think that I am somehow morally obligated to give you what I work hard for. Yes, I Ass-u-me that is what you want society to do for you.)

Wow, does the judge know you are off your meds????

The usual type of answer from someone who has no clue. You should really educate yourself so you can debate more intelligently.

lol that one went right over you didn't it?

No, it apprently went right over you.

Hahahahahahaha!

(mommy they want my stuff! wah!)

No, I don't want anything from society personally. I am very happy with my lot. :) 

As far as utopias go, I do not believe in them. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "utopian thought proccess," but I do believe we can do better than we do now. As Americans we are preconditioned to have a very high sense of entitlement, especially millenials. 

And to reply to your "assume" retort, I was referring to where you asked whether I donated the excess I made and then answered your own question with a no. 

"The moral dilemna is people thinking that those that earn more should have their extra taken away and given to those that don't have as much"

That is a strawman fabricated by political think tanks. Of course a doctor should earn a six digit salary, especially given how expensive medical school is.  Likewise, unions shouldn't have their wages cut either. 

You know those internet ads where they give you a free article that's mostly noise, but the good stuff you need to pay for at the very end?  The American education system is a lot like that, you attend school from K-12, but a high school diploma on its own is no good so to have any reasonable employment chances you need to pay for a very expensive service.  You have fluff courses that have absolutely nothing to do with your profession such as women's studies and history (if I wanted to know about feminism and history I'd Google it) that inflate costs too. 

"Six years ago she lost her job with Ford Motor."

Well, those Indians do work for less so why the hell should Ford have any loyalty to the very country it grew in and made it? 

"Ones that have no clean water to drink, ones that don't have enough to eat. Ones that are caught in human trafficking."

The aftermath of colonialism and factions fighting for what the leftover, and corporations going in there outright hiring thugs to kill those who defend their right to their own land from companies like Shell will do stuff like that.  Terrorist attacks like those against the West Virgiia coal miners happen today as well but in the developing world, instead of coal companies hiring the US government to kill protesters they're hiring private companies and terrorist organizations with corporate connections. 

You're not even worth thinking about any more.

<ignore_billyblat>True</ignore_billyblat>

The price of premium membership is well wort it=many extras to improve your game

A - It is not strawman argument. Why do we have a progressive tax system then. Lets just have everyone pay 10% and call it a day. It is stealing from those of us that make more to give to those who do not.

And "uinions" do not have their wages cut. Employees who belong to a union may have their wages cut but unions are organizations. They cannot have their wages cut.

B - You do not have a clue what you're talking about. She did not lose her job to outsourcing. So unless you can educate yourself on what happened you are just spouting ignorant assumptions.

C - Blah, blah, blah. Big mean corporations. Blah, blah, blah ......

Come back when you can do something other than regurgitate progressive gobbledy-gook.

P.S. Done with tracking this thread. Good luck to you all.

To the Chess.com staff, sorry if this turned into a more political thread than it should have. Keep up the good work, leaving my membership on auto-renew.

Chess.com is a buissness... they can price there membership at whatever price brings in the most money... as I said before it makes absolutly know sence to do anything else

yeah that's why I didn't want to 'reason' with you; i knew what you were going to say.