← All dilemmas
🏙️society
Should financially vulnerable people be offered payment to participate in medical research, or does this exploit their desperation while advancing public health?
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
Society dilemmas ask whose costs and whose voices count when no one wins everything. Choosing “Yes, it provides immediate aid to those in need and accelerates medical progress for everyone” prioritises long-term system health; choosing “No, it preys on economic hardship and risks undermining truly voluntary, informed consent” gives more weight to short-term relief for some.
Worth asking yourself
- Whose interests should count more here, and why?
- Would you accept the outcome from the losing side?
More Society Dilemmas
- A 90% one-time wealth tax on billionaires could end world hunger for 10 years. Billionaires would still be comfortably rich.
- Completely open borders between all countries — anyone can live and work anywhere without restrictions.
- Every adult receives €1,500/month from the government. Taxes for the top 20% double. Do you support it?
- All drugs are legalized, taxed, and regulated — removing the black market entirely. Portugal's model shows crime drops 50%. Do you support it?