Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2016-04-14 07:00 pm
[ SECRET POST #3389 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3389 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

__________________________________________________
12.

__________________________________________________
13.

__________________________________________________
14.

__________________________________________________
15.

__________________________________________________
16.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 022 secrets from Secret Submission Post #484.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Re: Video Games Economics
(Anonymous) 2016-04-15 01:22 am (UTC)(link)It's not an economics question, it's a psychology question. The reason why you wouldn't have monster hunters everywhere is that people wouldn't take the vast initial investment, the time required, and the risk, when there are other, better reward-to-risk job opportunities available, which there almost always are
Re: Video Games Economics
What DOES bother me thought, is how for example in FMA you could possibly have an alchemist be poor. Their abilities are so versatile, and it doesn't contain danger like monster-hunting. You could open up a building company or something and put everybody else out of a job by building a house in a day.