If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.
Let me ask two questions:
Do any of the answers make for a more effective (now forgetting 'fair') punishment? In otherwords, is one kid more likely to have "learned his lesson"?
What would you have chosen if #2 wasn't available? I look at X toys as completely arbitrary, but your response is not unlike other responses that I got. You somehow arrive at X as a cost of the crime (please feel free to correct me, it is not my intent to misrepresent).
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
Wow... people have a hard time dealing with hypotheticals... its pretty common sense on what the thread means, but maybe not everyone has common sense...Now whether you can compare this demonstration to other things, is a question in and of itself...
The first option, In this case, if you are trying to discipline children, the goal is to make them feel punished... the kid with more toys will still have toys to play with if any of the other options are used... the impact on the children would not be equal, the one with fewer toys is left with nothing... same with the progressive option, no matter what the kid with less toys gets more impacted because the value of the individual toys goes down the more you have.
1 toy= 30 VP
now when you already have one toy the VP of the toy you have decreases to
1 extra toy= 15 VP
now when you already have two toys the VP of the toy you have decreases to
1 extra toy= 7 VP
now when you already have three toys the VP of the toy you have decreases to
1 extra toy= 3 VP
1 toy=30 VP
2 toys=45 VP
3 toys=52 VP
4 toys=55 VP
so if you introduce a progressive system Kid with 2 toys decrease to one, kid with 4 toys decreases to 2
kid with 2 toys lost 15 VPs
kid with 4 toys lost 10 VPs
*Depending on the value deprecation of toys when amount of toys increase, this relationship changes, AND the value per toy would be different for each child just based on their attitude...so this is an all around imprecise/unfair method*
This example also shows that kid with 4 toys actually loses more value when all toys get taken away.
With this VP example it is impossible to be 100% fair in this instance...a progressive punishment isn't equal because the oject itself get depreciated as well... so it's double scaled.
Since no option is fair.... taking them all away gives the full affect of them punishment equally !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!UNLESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! you are taking away the toys permanently...in that case boy with 4 toys is getting punished far worse because he is permanently losing more VP... THEN a progressive punishment system would be more fair.
What are you afraid of? We're not in the same room. I have no ability to embarrass you in front of your friends. You have an opportunity to explain your logic. Take it.