If there were no broke people, and everyone had the same income, would the world be a better place?

Who is going to do all of the qashin jobs and hard working jobs like mining etc if everyone would get equal pay
 

4head

The one and only 4head
VIP
Never going to happen.
Human greed and vanity will always exist; poor people would stay as Jim Ron, famous "coach" in the self-help community, because poor people don't understand the rules of money and how to accumulate it. The top 1% know the "ruages" of the system; can they also monopolize, make alliances between rich families and keep wealth to themselves.

Either, we teach people how to make the most money, but some will get a better deal while others will suffer in agony.
Or,
We ban money and all currencies in papers and switch to the "barter"; people in the early stages of Civilization, in the Mesopotamian regions, would have transactions in goods exchanged with goods; a bag of rice exchanged with cattle.

Banning money will also mean no more banking systems, no loans, and people wouldn't invest their assets in banks. But also, the end of cyclical economic crisis, no more debts for countries and commoners, and people like Warren Buffet wouldn't work (but do not worry for him, he's a well-established investor, with billions in reserve in assets).

To summarize:
People would find other ways of payment (maybe, we'd pay and live on Crypto in the future), without any government regulations but the stock will be more versatile than now as we wouldn't have clear inflammation rates. But it does also mean no more taxation (or less taxes), no more personal debts, moreover, we would witness the end of Globalization and International Free Trades.

But with the disappearance of physical money, would it be the end of our atavic inherited greed and thirst for more wealth? I doubt it; as shown, like the example of Warren Buffet, the very rich would find ways to keep money from the people, while the example of poor people wouldn't know how to keep profit and fructify it. It's an Eternal vicious cycle.

The Communists knew that by refraining people from wealth, altogether, the chances of seeing a Plutocracy or an Oligarchy would be thin. Kinda funny though as the Soviets had an elite of government high ranking officials, also known as the "Nomenklatura". Having the luxury of living above the lives of common Soviets; they lived in Stalin-style of apartments (luxurious, big), called "Stalinka", and with their position of privilege, they had their cars;
1627383488812.png
Even among Commies, to this day,
Class-Elitism still exists, despite the Egalitarian efforts to tame it; our nature can't be overturned.
Sorry for the overly dramatic and pessimistic conclusion but humans are such a disappointing race.
 

mrlog

Classy not Ashy, walaahi
Never going to happen.
Human greed and vanity will always exist; poor people would stay as Jim Ron, famous "coach" in the self-help community, because poor people don't understand the rules of money and how to accumulate it. The top 1% know the "ruages" of the system; can they also monopolize, make alliances between rich families and keep wealth to themselves.

Either, we teach people how to make the most money, but some will get a better deal while others will suffer in agony.
Or,
We ban money and all currencies in papers and switch to the "barter"; people in the early stages of Civilization, in the Mesopotamian regions, would have transactions in goods exchanged with goods; a bag of rice exchanged with cattle.

Banning money will also mean no more banking systems, no loans, and people wouldn't invest their assets in banks. But also, the end of cyclical economic crisis, no more debts for countries and commoners, and people like Warren Buffet wouldn't work (but do not worry for him, he's a well-established investor, with billions in reserve in assets).

To summarize:
People would find other ways of payment (maybe, we'd pay and live on Crypto in the future), without any government regulations but the stock will be more versatile than now as we wouldn't have clear inflammation rates. But it does also mean no more taxation (or less taxes), no more personal debts, moreover, we would witness the end of Globalization and International Free Trades.

But with the disappearance of physical money, would it be the end of our atavic inherited greed and thirst for more wealth? I doubt it; as shown, like the example of Warren Buffet, the very rich would find ways to keep money from the people, while the example of poor people wouldn't know how to keep profit and fructify it. It's an Eternal vicious cycle.

The Communists knew that by refraining people from wealth, altogether, the chances of seeing a Plutocracy or an Oligarchy would be thin. Kinda funny though as the Soviets had an elite of government high ranking officials, also known as the "Nomenklatura". Having the luxury of living above the lives of common Soviets; they lived in Stalin-style of apartments (luxurious, big), called "Stalinka", and with their position of privilege, they had their cars; View attachment 194989 Even among Commies, to this day,
Class-Elitism still exists, despite the Egalitarian efforts to tame it; our nature can't be overturned.
Sorry for the overly dramatic and pessimistic conclusion but humans are such a disappointing race.

Wow u wrote a thesis
 

Trending

Top