http://9gag.com/gag/4059799
Am I the only one who sees potential for mutually beneficial transactions here? :p
That's the essense of what I've been trying to say. Yet everyone said my idea is offensive.
Here are some ways to get both.
Choose sugar relationship over marriage.
You think if women pick the rich they are loved less? Depends on how you define love. If you define love by exclusivity, then yea, most attractive males are best sellers and exclusivity is expensive. Is that the kind of love women want?
What about not stoning? What about not resorting to hitting? What about spending money for her and her children? Isn't that a more worthy manifestation of love?
Many women would rather share a rich smart loving males than be the only one for the poor one. That's it. Now they both get love and wealth.
Many rich men would love getting more women and hence, have more kids.
It's legal but not too legal. Explicit sugar relationship is a crime under anti prostitution laws.
99% want the 1% contribute more. Fine. Let the 1% breed into 50% more, and for the same tax rate, socialism will no longer be big issue.
What about poverty in other countries due to over population? You think women in those countries don't want to be with richer man in rich countries? If only there is no anti women trafficking laws, the hottest among them would have gone here. No more stoning. Any males that don't treat their women right will have their hottest babes move somewhere else they are more appreciated.