Redistributions would or could be considered obsolete when staking gets launched?
How about a tax that’s 2% buy, 2% sell; all for the SLP? The buy tax would serve the same purpose as why we had the sell tax initially. You have to supply to the SLP; so you can actively serve your tokens within the project and stake when you want to. I think that this is also in line with the management costs associated certain types of investments like bonds, ETFs, etc.
Keeping it symmetric (for no apparent reason) and a continued funding of the SLP for the (upcoming) hard money loans.
The wallet to wallet transfers should probably be free of taxation? Unless there’s a loophole (that I can’t really think of) in there.
I’m also well aware that the tokenomics can and probably will be changed again down the line to further serve the project’s continuation and the holders.
I’d be willing to give up all redistribution %s and have them flow into the SLP aswell. Also agree on adding say a 1-3% buy tax that is put into the SLP. Staking would eventually cover these %s.
If there were to be any buy tax, I’m in favor of nothing more than 1%. We don’t want to put off our investors with not allowing them to receive their moneys worth of the token. In addition to let’s say a higher buy tax, price impact is also a thing to consider which results in fewer or more tokens depending on how much you buy at once, right? Correct me if I’m wrong. So if there are too many variables of someone new coming in getting their moneys worth, I personally don’t feel it’s a good look.
BankSocial is always about the power to the people & to give them their fair contribution. I feel we should stick to that in every aspect. Again, I understand the buy tax. 1% should be enough in my opinion.
I am also in favor of having all redistributions going instead to the lending pool when staking is introduced.*
Seems most are in favor of some sort of buy tax, reducing sell tax some and moving more over to SLP. I don’t think we need to vote on that.
I think we need to take some of the more popular ideas generated and put it out in a poll for next steps. Once the poll is done, we can then pick the one that wins and put out for vote.
I also agree with who ever said it probably doesn’t make sense to change the reflections until staking is live. That makes sense to me. Essentially we will have staking for loans and then also debit card reward staking, reflections would no longer be needed at that point. Also, down the road when rewardsocial is released and referrals are other ways to earn.
I see this went to temperature check. I’m sorry, but in it’s current form, I cannot vote for this.
Let me elaborate!
I don’t know what exact numbers are we voting on? 1-5%? 3-3%? 4-4%? Redistribution: yay or nay?
We also need John’s “official” word on how painful this change would be.
If it would require a new contract? Hell no. Not now. Maybe later. If it doesn’t? Hell yes, get on with it asap!
My recommendation @Dr_Krash: get @PresidentHODL to comment on this then open a new temperature check post, with clear numbers, John’s comment, and a link to this discussion. That I’ll vote on asap.
And my vote, after seeing this discussion is still a 1%buy, 5%sell, no redistribution move.
But can accept basically anything that doesn’t scare people away and makes the slp nice and fat.
With the current contract we cannot set a separate buy vs sell tax… We can turn buy tax on and off and we can adjust the tax. We can make the redistribution as high or to 0 and we can make the SLP share as high or low as we want. We just cant say 1% on buys and 5% on sells. BUt we can say all buys/sells are 5% to SLP and 0 redistro…
We all have our own difficulties in this life, so trying to punish people when they sell without knowing the reason is a bit hard. I know your target are maybe whales but we cant control that, so for me maybe 50/50 buy and sell.
