Answer the question, Midwit. If you can. A single question. Not all, a single question. You still haven't. You've told me to research, you've changed the parameters of the original question. But you haven't, even once, said why it's wrong according to lolbertarianism. I have given you plenty of chances. I have even changed the parameters to make your fees fees better, but the arrangement is the same. A child of an age old enough to verbally agree, with parents permission, trades sex or their gender for something they value. It's a basic material for service transaction. Prostitution, which most lolberts think is A-ok. Consenting 7 year old, Consenting Old Man with Candy, Consenting Parents. Nobody else can get involved because it's not their kid, their family, or their old man. Not child abuse because it's what the kid wants. And before you argue that perhaps, giving a kid something they want all the time is child abuse, let's say this is a one time thing. Kid gets candy and is ok with it, Old man is ok with it, parents are ok with it. Lolbertarians have no answer. This is the Lolberts *perfect free market world*. >As I said, I'm not going to do that, and if you don't want to put in the work, then that's on you. My time is more valuable than talking to some NPC, ok? And you have the lack of self-awareness to accuse me of intellectual dishonesty. Hah. Midwits going to midwit. Accuse em of being an NPC when all you've done is repeat the same SJW refrain of "JFGI" I am beginning to think you don't know lolbertarianism.