← All dilemmas
🌍society
Accetteresti bollette piu alte se riducessero il rischio di una guerra piu ampia?
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 “Paga di piu per ridurre il rischio di escalation” prioritises long-term system health; choosing “Pretendi energia meno cara, anche se aumenta la pressione politica” 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 one-time wealth tax would fund 10 years of food aid to the people who need it most. Billionaires would still be billionaires.
- 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?