Am I the only one that had a bizarre thought like, "Why are all these American and Western European artists trying to take these jobs away from hard-working Asian and Eastern European artists?"

I don't think they're saying give it to American artists, they're saying pay more to whoever you hire. And that's not arguing that this means less hiring of artists in this region because they're arguing that the "more" should come from the company's profits, not from reducing the amount of art commissioned.

But if those are already excellent rates in Asia and Eastern Europe, why should they be any higher?

Am I the only one that had a bizarre thought like, "Why are all these American and Western European artists trying to take these jobs away from hard-working Asian and Eastern European artists?"

I don't think they're saying give it to American artists, they're saying pay more to whoever you hire. And that's not arguing that this means less hiring of artists in this region because they're arguing that the "more" should come from the company's profits, not from reducing the amount of art commissioned.

But if those are already excellent rates in Asia and Eastern Europe, why should they be any higher?

Taking the jobs away from them?... They are being exploited because they are poor and desperate. We should make conditions better all around, not keep prices and wages low so exploitation is allowed to continue.

They are not excellent rates in Eastern Europe and Asia. A lot of eastern europeans come to Norway and other western european countries to get jobs and start a better life, even more come as seasonal labourers for 6 months at the time, some very desperate few come to do crime and small "heists" and leave again. Compare them to mexicans who come to America to work and make money in want of a better life for themselves and their families. Some asian countries are known for exploiting labour and even have sweatshops that revolve around exploiting children and other cheap labour. Exploitation is the key word here. Exploiting the poor and desperate isn`t cool.

Artists from these countries shouldn`t be exploited either, just because they are poor and desperate and willing to do jobs at a cheaper rate than anyone else just so they can eat and support their families, in addition to working other poorly paid jobs or being unemployed.

Am I the only one that had a bizarre thought like, "Why are all these American and Western European artists trying to take these jobs away from hard-working Asian and Eastern European artists?"

I don't think they're saying give it to American artists, they're saying pay more to whoever you hire. And that's not arguing that this means less hiring of artists in this region because they're arguing that the "more" should come from the company's profits, not from reducing the amount of art commissioned.

But if those are already excellent rates in Asia and Eastern Europe, why should they be any higher?

Taking the jobs away from them?... They are being exploited because they are poor and desperate. We should make conditions better all around, not keep prices and wages low so exploitation is allowed to continue.

They are not excellent rates in Eastern Europe and Asia. A lot of eastern europeans come to Norway and other western european countries to get jobs and start a better life, even more come as seasonal labourers for 6 months at the time, some very desperate few come to do crime and small "heists" and leave again. Compare them to mexicans who come to America to work and make money in want of a better life for themselves and their families. Some asian countries are known for exploiting labour and even have sweatshops that revolve around exploiting children and other cheap labour. Exploitation is the key word here. Exploiting the poor and desperate isn`t cool.

Artists from these countries shouldn`t be exploited either, just because they are poor and desperate and willing to do jobs at a cheaper rate than anyone else just so they can eat and support their families, in addition to working other poorly paid jobs or being unemployed.

http://www.reinisfischer.com/average-salary-european-union-2015

That's not true though, in a place like Bulgaria a $100 is a quarter of the average monthly salary. All of these eastern European countries have average monthly salaries below $1000, with most below $800 a month, so $100 for a piece of contract art work is quite good in those markets.

I specifically remember my buddy mentioning Bulgaria in particular, and how it's impossible to compete with what they can pay artists there. A $100 a piece sucks in the eyes of a western artist, in Bulgaria an artist who is putting forth serious effort, and especially working digitally, is probably earning 2 or 3 x the average monthly salary in that nation at $100 a piece.

http://www.reinisfischer.com/average-salary-european-union-2015

That's not true though, in a place like Bulgaria a $100 is a quarter of the average monthly salary. All of these eastern European countries have average monthly salaries below $1000, with most below $800 a month, so $100 for a piece of contract art work is quite good in those markets.

I specifically remember my buddy mentioning Bulgaria in particular, and how it's impossible to compete with what they can pay artists there. A $100 a piece sucks in the eyes of a western artist, in Bulgaria an artist who is putting forth serious effort, and especially working digitally, is probably earning 2 or 3 x the average monthly salary in that nation at $100 a piece.

They still have lower buying power(or whatever it is called in english). Even if their average salaries, only one factor of the economy, is this and that, that doesn`t mean the average salary of a eastern european is very good.

The average salary of a eastern european citizen should be higher than what it is. At least, that is my opinion. I think the minimum wage and average salaries of americans should be much higher too, to keep up with other modern, western first world countries.

That's no indication of exploitation. Saying someone should earn more may be sweet sentiment but the assertion you put forth is that artist's in eastern Europe are being exploited. Quite the contrary actually, an artist in eastern Europe who is putting forth the effort and being paid $100 a piece is likely earning 2 to 3 x the average wage in place like Bulgaria. In some of the others they are earning probably as much, or even more than the average worker in their country. Put another way, not only are they not being exploited, they're making really good money in some of these countries.

1. Labourers are usually paid local wages, perhaps illustrators are an exception to that, I wouldn't know. This means that an illustrator from Bulgaria, to use that as an example, probably wouldn't get paid $100. Probably a lot less. Still, this absolutely lower number of $ may be relatively higher when it comes to cost of living than for instance the US. I doubt that though, but that's pure speculative doubt. There's nothing wrong with hiring a Bulgarian illustrator, unless that drives down the cost of illustrations in such a manner that anyone but a Bulgarian illustrator cannot live off illustrating. Pretty much what goes on in the textile industry today, child labour in Asian countries to such an extent that it's hardly worthwhile producing it anywhere else. This is bad in two ways: it kills industry in less cheap countries and you de facto enslave children and their families, by paying them just enough for them to barely sustain themselves. Western companies and corporations have been neglecting it's responsibility here.

That's no indication of exploitation. Saying someone should earn more may be sweet sentiment but the assertion you put forth is that artist's in eastern Europe are being exploited. Quite the contrary actually, an artist in eastern Europe who is putting forth the effort and being paid $100 a piece is likely earning 2 to 3 x the average wage in place like Bulgaria. In some of the others they are earning probably as much, or even more than the average worker in their country. Put another way, not only are they not being exploited, they're making really good money in some of these countries.

Yes, I see your point and I get it

However, I don`t like the "hey, that`s a lot of money to those people" thing, it feels very wrong.

Paying someone less than what they deserve, just because it is more than what they are used to isn`t right, it`s exploitation and it`s sad.

I wouldn`t go to Central Africa and feel good about paying someone with bread and rice, just because it was more than what they are used to ("that`s a lot to those people").

And I certainly wouldn`t call it fair. People should be payed what they deserve no matter where they are from or how sucky their government is or how poor the country is. Giving citizens of a country more purchasing power is also good for the internal economy and infrastructure of that country and would help them out in the long run and as a result boost international trade.

Win/win

Your points 1 & 2 seem to be in conflict in their implication.

Ignoring the (apparently unfounded) assertion that the $100/piece figure only applies to US artists and isn't simple across the board, but rather is adjusted by FFG to suit the economic situation of the location of their freelancers (unlikely, but I supposed technically possible), in the first point, it's "those poor unfortunate folks in other countries not getting paid enough", then in point 2, it's "if they ARE getting the same pay, screw those poor unfortunate folks in other countries, US artists are being passed over!"

I think it'd be *far* more likely, and require less speculation, to say that FFG likely has a base price per piece, whatever it may be (the popular $100 figure or otherwise), and that's what they're willing to may to whomever gets the nod, regardless of where they are. This has the effect of disproportionately favoring people in developing areas of the world, where 100 USD goes a lot further than it does in the US.

Ultimately, for the critics, this is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for FFG. If they're paying different prices to people based on their location, they're gouging the third world, if they're paying the same across the board, they're shipping jobs overseas. The same critics say that, above all, they should be paying *more*, yet they have yet to say just how much more would be satisfactory (likely because such a number would be absolutely impractical for a company like FFG to pay, even if they could cound on their sales figures holding steady with the upcharge).

Yes, I see your point and I get it

However, I don`t like the "hey, that`s a lot of money to those people" thing, it feels very wrong.

Paying someone less than what they deserve, just because it is more than what they are used to isn`t right, it`s exploitation and it`s sad.

I wouldn`t go to Central Africa and feel good about paying someone with bread and rice, just because it was more than what they are used to ("that`s a lot to those people").

And I certainly wouldn`t call it fair. People should be payed what they deserve no matter where they are from or how sucky their government is or how poor the country is. Giving citizens of a country more purchasing power is also good for the internal echonomy and infrastructure of that country and would help them out in the long run and as a result boost international trade.

Win/win

Once more, with feeling...how do you define what someone "deserves", and how can you possibly nail that down to a numeric figure that applies regardless of context? Even further complicating the issue, how do you define (without resorting to the subjective "Well, I feel..." kind of arguments) what a given piece of art is worth?

Not even taking into account the destabilization that would come along with a company rolling into a third world country and paying western world wages (definitely not the win/win solution you're envisioning), I can't see the logic behind ignoring compensation with respect to the local cost of living and going straight from a number on a sheet of paper (all while conveniently ignoring the fact that that number itself was determined based on the greater context of the local economic situation in that area).

Not liking the vast disparity in socioeconomic situations across the world is one thing, proposing to fix that by the methods you're suggesting is quite another.

There's a reason you hear people referred to as "starving artists" and you don't normally hear anyone refer to "starving sanitation workers" or "starving road repair crews". You choose to be an artist while I don't think many people get the opportunity to choose to do the things they end up doing to pay the bills. If the choice isn't paying well enough, you've gotta make another choice. Pay your bills THEN do freelance art. Lots of people would love to make a few $$$ doing something in their free time that they love doing, anyway. Can you imagine someone paying you $100 to play an RPG for 15 hours???

Don't get me wrong. I want artists to make a gazillion dollars. I want them to be able to smear paint on their butts and churn out masterpieces by sitting on a canvas and shimmying. I want them to be happy. But contractors make their market. If you want a job, you undercut the competition. When the contracting entity sees what they can get by spending X, don't expect them to spend X+... unless you have a Union backing you. But discussing that is opening a can of worms of the Dune variety.

Yes, I see your point and I get it

However, I don`t like the "hey, that`s a lot of money to those people" thing, it feels very wrong.

Paying someone less than what they deserve, just because it is more than what they are used to isn`t right, it`s exploitation and it`s sad.

I wouldn`t go to Central Africa and feel good about paying someone with bread and rice, just because it was more than what they are used to ("that`s a lot to those people").

And I certainly wouldn`t call it fair. People should be payed what they deserve no matter where they are from or how sucky their government is or how poor the country is. Giving citizens of a country more purchasing power is also good for the internal echonomy and infrastructure of that country and would help them out in the long run and as a result boost international trade.

Win/win

Once more, with feeling...how do you define what someone "deserves", and how can you possibly nail that down to a numeric figure that applies regardless of context? Even further complicating the issue, how do you define (without resorting to the subjective "Well, I feel..." kind of arguments) what a given piece of art is worth?

Not even taking into account the destabilization that would come along with a company rolling into a third world country and paying western world wages (definitely not the win/win solution you're envisioning), I can't see the logic behind ignoring compensation with respect to the local cost of living and going straight from a number on a sheet of paper (all while conveniently ignoring the fact that that number itself was determined based on the greater context of the local economic situation in that area).

Not liking the vast disparity in socioeconomic situations across the world is one thing, proposing to fix that by the methods you're suggesting is quite another.

There already exist rules and laws of international trade and conduct and human rights in addition to fair-trade programs and organizations

Instability comes out of poverty , not from "incerting money" into third world countries, history has prooved that increasing wealth is a way of ensuring stability in the long run and often even in the short run. Just look at the Marshall Plan as an example, after World War 2 and how it got the World back on its feet.

Well isn`t this interesting and fun

I'm really very fortunate I was first interested in EotE last year. This forum is far less interesting now the game has actually been released. If this is what potential new players have to look forward to, I pity the future of the game.

I'm really very fortunate I was first interested in EotE last year. This forum is far less interesting now the game has actually been released. If this is what potential new players have to look forward to, I pity the future of the game.

Yes, we have gone on far too long now.... Let`s talk Star Wars again! The prequels suffered from too much boring politics, I guess it is happening to the forums now. Sorry.

We need a good Diplomat by now!.. Or JJ Abrams.

If you're equating the Marshall Plan (a broad-scope policy designed specifically to avoid the kind of spikes you're suggesting by paying US wages to workers in developing countries) with anything in this discussion, I think you've pretty much jumped the shark. The kind of orders-out-of-proportion money infusion you're talking about is exactly the sort of economic manipulation that shady companies use to effectively buy governments in developing areas. Suddenly the mostly poor-but-equal socioeconomic situation turns into "Company Employees and Have Nots", and at that point, you've just created even more disparity, now on a local level. Not only does this allow those company employees to impose their will however they like within their community, but it also gives the company the ultimate trump card: do what we say, or we're going to some other place. In big-picture economics, generally, slow but steady change is preferable to sudden, drastic change...and paying 3rd world artists money that could get them a comfortable living in the US is definitely the latter. We even see the same principles at play within the US. Two guys doing the same work, one in Mississippi and one in Vermont are going to make significantly different amounts, all else being equal. In this case, just as with outsourcing, pay is measured in the units of dollars, but is set based on the local costs of living and doing business. This isn't new by any means. (Incidentally, this is where your international trade laws come in, much like the minimum wage regulations we've already discussed in depth. They don't come anywhere near stipulating paying 3rd world laborers 1st world wages, though, mostly because the economists who helped determine these laws know that that would lead to a real mess).

Additionally, there's quite a bit of middle ground between "paying a fair wage" and "human rights violation". If you're going to take FFG to task, at least have the decency to get specific about what you don't like and what you want them to do to fix it. You've already suggested "fair pay" but define it. And if you're going to suggest that paying less in weaker economies constituyes a human rights violation, then just come out and say that you think FFG is committing human rights violations. It's a pretty dodgy discussion tactic to hint at a bunch of implications, but never actually establish a position, and it suggests that there's little solid ground upon which to found your argument in the first place.

You mean a Plutocracy? Rule by the rich.

That works too. No matter where or when you are the wealthy and powerful rule either behind the scenes or out in the open. Those without money and power are subjects of those rulers. The only real difference is the degree of malevolence they have for those subjects and whether or not the subjects are aware of the truth. At least a medieval peasant knew he was a subject and so did all his neighbors. These days the names have changed but we peasants have no more real power over our futures than our ancestors did.

The only time humans have real liberty and freedom is when they are in frontier areas and government has yet to catch up with them. Unfortunately such lives are nasty, brutish and short. The up side of being peasants is those in power who feed upon us don't like competition.

So to take this back to the reason for this forum, the rim systems are an excellent example of such frontier situations. At first the people are truly free, the only rules are the ones they set for themselves. The risk is high, from nature and their fellow sapients, but the reward is owning themselves and all they produce. But unfortunately for them they long for some of the safety of the rim worlds, so they form what at first is an innocuous city government but once they do that all heck breaks loose. Those who seek power and wealth quickly move to take positions in that government or put people in place whose strings can be easily pulled. Once they achieve that all they need to do is wait for or create some crisis to get the people to accept increases in government control. Eventually the people are no better off than they were on a core world. The Emperors rise to power is no different than any two bit crime boss taking over a settlement in a perfectly legal, yet ultimately immoral, way.

People who say "there ought to be a law" when they see something as unfair need to take a step back. Making someone do something because you think you know how it ought to be is how people like the Emperor rise to power. They use people like that to further their goals. In many cases what you see as unfair is seen as a good deal by someone else. Take the OP, $100 a piece taking two days to produce and sell seems like a pittance however those two days of work are mostly spent at home in ones bathrobe. No boss breathing down your neck, no employees to worry about, no heavy lifting and no hours spent in the summers heat or winters cold. No customers whining and no commute through rush hour traffic. Just working from home without any commitments beyond what you make for yourself.

That sounds like the life all the get rich quick scams try to sell us. Make money from home doing something you love to do. For many who chose that lifestyle the lower pay may be a fair trade to them. Remember, no one made them go to the Art Institutes of America to learn their trade. No one made them take piece work jobs. No one made them accept $100 a piece. If there weren't artists willing to produce pieces at that rate then FFG would have to pay more. Just like if we weren't willing to pay $25 for a book they would have to lower the price and offer their artists even less.

Once you decide to get in the middle and ask the Emperor to "make it right" the cost per piece goes up to say $200 and the company has to either use less art, meaning fewer jobs, or charge more for the book meaning fewer customers. They could try to Walmart the deal and cut profits to pennies per unit and simply move more units of a lower quality. Imagine a new release every month of models you need to assemble and paint yourself that have cards with amazing abilities on them you just HAVE to own to remain competitive. If that happened then FFG would be just like Games Workshop and who wants that?

Life is inherently unfair. Attempts to make it fair are destined to make things worse.

Isn`t plutocracy a form of oligarchy?

Isn`t plutocracy a form of oligarchy?

Not necessarily.

For a SW Universe example of an exception to that rule, look at the Corporate Sector.

Life is inherently unfair. Attempts to make it fair are destined to make things worse.

What? That's just self-defeating. "Attempts to make it fair" are why most of us don't live as peasants anymore, why, despite pushback, most of us have worker safety laws, hours limits, vacation time, minimum wages, etc. Basically, we took some power from the plutocrats (and plenty died doing it) and spread it around...the irony, which appears to be lost on the plutocrats, is we made it better for them too.

Life is not fair, agreed. I'll also agree that becoming an artist is a choice that puts you in a different labour category than most. Personally I would be happy to see a greater portion of my tax dollars be spent on "the arts", whether that supporting the local symphonies or local artists. But for wages on commercial products it would simply have to be whatever the market would bear. The process of making art is too difficult to quantify to set a "minimum wage" for it because the hours it takes for a piece would vary wildly.

But, overall, attempts to make life more fair are a moral imperative IMHO. We might not always get it right, because we're human and it's a work in progress, but we have to try.

Life is inherently unfair. Attempts to make it fair are destined to make things worse.

Right.. Why did we ever end slavery, give women the right to vote and all that nonsense? It only made things worse...

Hey, do you guys remember that Star Wars game we used to play?

Hey, do you guys remember that Star Wars game we used to play?

If you've tired of the discussion (that you created), feel free to abandon it.

Nobody is forcing your participation, why feel the need to pressure others to also stop discussing just because you're no longer interested?

There seems to be a weird sort of entitlement on this site where some people (non-mods) feel they can and should tell everyone else what to talk about, what not to talk about, and when to stop.

Life is inherently unfair. Attempts to make it fair are destined to make things worse.

Hey, do you guys remember that Star Wars game we used to play?

You should go to a Star Wars game forum if you want to discuss th... Oh.. umm... YEAH!

Darth Vader finds all this political/economy talk disturbing.

Personally I would be happy to see a greater portion of my tax dollars be spent on "the arts", whether that supporting the local symphonies or local artists.

No. We are already pretty off topic so I don't feel like this is too much of a diversion, but spending tax dollars to support local artists is a mixed bag. Taxes being used to fund spaces for art (building a symphony hall) is about the limit of what I think tax dollars should do in the art world. It gets murky when government officials are using tax dollars to commission pieces. Is a government board member qualified to judge the quality and value of art? Is an elected official?

Right.. Why did we ever end slavery, give women the right to vote and all that nonsense? It only made things worse...

I know you are joking, but I can only picture that buzzfeed thing about who said it, Donald Trump or Lucille Bluthe.

Clarification: Buzzfeed is a **** website that I am in no way endorsing, but that individual "article" was entertaining.

Hey, do you guys remember that Star Wars game we used to play?

If you've tired of the discussion (that you created), feel free to abandon it.

Nobody is forcing your participation, why feel the need to pressure others to also stop discussing just because you're no longer interested?

There seems to be a weird sort of entitlement on this site where some people (non-mods) feel they can and should tell everyone else what to talk about, what not to talk about, and when to stop.

Hehe. "pressure"...

Am I the only one that had a bizarre thought like, "Why are all these American and Western European artists trying to take these jobs away from hard-working Asian and Eastern European artists?"

I don't think they're saying give it to American artists, they're saying pay more to whoever you hire. And that's not arguing that this means less hiring of artists in this region because they're arguing that the "more" should come from the company's profits, not from reducing the amount of art commissioned.

But if those are already excellent rates in Asia and Eastern Europe, why should they be any higher?

I don't know. Maybe it's nice for people not to be paid less just because they are poorer?

Isn`t plutocracy a form of oligarchy?

More something that mostly overlaps with oligarchy in any real world situation.