• Of course! The world economy isn't a "zero sum" deal!
  • Yes :)
  • Yes... Make the government smaller, less expensive, and disallow pork in EVERY damn bill that goes through.
  • There will always be someone who is very poor and someone who is very rich....they are parameters that enclose us and can define us. You can't make the poor less poor. You can take away stuff to make an individual 'poorer' than another and in giving them anything to make them less or equally poor, is only relative to what they were before and in comparison to others. I think.
  • I don't see why we should try, nobody needs b/millions, If it could be possible, it would still be unfair and the poor would still be comparitively poor so , i guess, it isn't possible... Changing the level of poverty doesn't remove it entirely...
  • No it isn't.
  • Not in a Republic.
  • That could take away the fun toys called red tape and bureaucracy.
  • With the amount of money the rich have it would affect them none to have $100 less every week in their paycheck, but it would make a world of difference to a poor person to have an extra $100 in their check every week. In essence, in order for the poor to have more money the rich have to give up something, but the effect it would have on each of them are totally different.
  • The simple answer is we need to build more stuff. If we have 6 billion people on the planet then we need to build 6 billion houses, cars and pizzas, if you get my drift. If we build twelve billion houses, cars and pizzas then everyone can have two of everything, regardless of how much money is in the system! Money is just a way of deciding how to ration stuff when we haven't built enough, eg, 6 million pizzas amongst 6 billion people.
  • Of course it's possible but people are impatient. They want results now! They can stay poor.
  • No. And whats wrong with making the rich less rich; ever heard about compassion and sharing?
  • Let'ssay that it is not possible--would that stop you from making sure that people (and children) don;t go to bed hungry, or that they are enabled to have adequate educations, or decent medical care.
  • Eliminate currency and bring forth a society where the goods and services and distributed without prejudice for the well being off all and the benefit of mankind. I think that is Marxism. Now, if you just want to make the poor less poor, then give them money. That is called socialism. Both tend to cut down on productivity of society.
  • Why is it our job to make the poor less poor? Whether it's possible or not, it's not our job.
  • In theory yes. But anything that doesn't get folks to change their attitudes or motivations, will not work.
  • Wealth is not a zero sum game. There is not a fixed amount of wealth that some people get more of at the expense of others. The secret to poor getting less poor is education (increased skills, less vulnerable to bullshit and exploitation) and free market (more opportunities to market their abilities).
  • Limiting oneself as to how many children to have.
  • The problem here is perception. Financial disadvantage does not = poor. And financial advantage does not = rich. A smile costs nothing but enriches a life. A woman with more money bought some yarn. She gave it to me to crochet a blanket for a woman who has suffered a stroke and is bedridden. I added some yarn of my own to it, and in the end we were all blessed! I'm far richer for having seen the smiles on the faces of both those women and I can only imagine how the lady's mother feels just because we did something for her bedridden daughter. Do something for someone today and see if you feel poorer or richer for having done it!
  • In the long term, yes, of course. The average human has been getting richer and richer for the past two millennia, at least. In the short term, though, and as far as widespread change, I doubt it. The global economy depends on resources and access to those resources, and any major shift in that takes time to develop.
  • The keys to not being in poverty in America - 1- Graduate high school 2- Don't have kids before you're married 3- Get a full time job. You do that, you have a better than average chance at not being poor.
    • bostjan the adequate 🥉
      I respectfully disagree. For example, in Detroit, poverty is around $495/week, and minimum wage is $9.45. At minimum wage, excluding all deductions except the flat city tax, a person would have to work at least 54 hours per week to make poverty level, which is well above the standard 40 hour work week. If you have deductions for health insurance, state and federal taxes (which you would have to pay without children), and whatever, you would have to, more realistically, work well over 100 hours per week (typically 112.5 hours/week, based off average data) to stay above the poverty level, and that's obviously not a realistic expectation. It's also a fact that many college graduates in Detroit don't make much more than minimum wage unless they are lucky enough to get a job with one of the automotive suppliers/manufacturers.
    • Archie Bunker
      64, all I said that was that abiding by those 3 rules gave you a better than average chance. It's not going to apply to everyone all the time. All rules have an exception, even the one that says all rules have an exception. And I can sit here all day and talk about why Detroit is in a hole economically and ways to fix it, but that's another topic.
  • It's called "giving charity"

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy