• Dissasterix @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, whats the ambient level of abuse? Do you think it’ll tick up significantly? Lets say a growth of +5%? Im very doubtful. Abusing foster kids has an immediate economic incentive, the vote is a 50/50 gamble on a slow trickle of incentive. The game-theory will still favor abusing foster kids, IMO.

      • Dissasterix @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes. And that’s not an argument. If we had a genie, it’d probably be in my three wishes. However we do not. Do you disagree with my incentives reasoning or not? I think it’s still pretty good.

        I think it could also be argued that being a cognitively functioning adult that has not attempted to teach the youth is also abusive. You’re letting em rot. If you dont take one then they’ll just go to someone presumably more abusive than you-- You monster! :p And in doing so, in saving the youth, you’d be allowed to select some stooges into office. Its sounding better by the reply, lol.

          • Dissasterix @lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It sure feels like Im the only one doing any explaining here :p Lets do a lil quid-pro-quo. Ill ramble on after you’ve shown some sign of life here, sheesh.

            Again: Do you think my incentives rationale makes sense?