Is there something wrong with the wealth distribution in our world? Is it obscene that we have multi-billionaires when thousands die of starvation every day?
In his blog, Sam Harris says, "Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, the two richest men in the United States, each have around $50 billion. Let’s put this number in perspective: They each have a thousand times the amount of money you would have if you were a movie star who had managed to save $50 million over the course of a very successful career. Think of every actor you can name or even dimly recognize, including the rare few who have banked hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years, and run this highlight reel back half a century. Gates and Buffet each have more personal wealth than all of these glamorous men and women—from Bogart and Bacall to Pitt and Jolie—combined.
"In fact, there are people who rank far below Gates and Buffet in net worth, who still make several million dollars a day, every day of the year, and have throughout the current recession."
Click here to continue reading: How Rich is too Rich?
So the question is:
"How much wealth should one person be allowed to keep? A trillion dollars? Ten trillion? (Fifty trillion is the current GDP of Earth.)"
32 comments:
AS to the question "how rich is to rich?",the word rich referring to how strong a person is economically. The answer am differ from person to person but mathematically no one can be too rich at the same time coming back to reality any one who has no problem spending money without "thinking twice" on any thing is too rich as more than half of the population on Earth is living in poverty .
may*
earth are * living in poverty
A part of me says:
- WOW, to poses 50 million dollars, you must be very rich.
But the other part of me says:
-To poses a good sum of green paper is sufficient, but to be surrounded by people you care for; is priceless!
My personal opinion, is that the money a person makes is up to them.
They should be able to make money up to trillions without people interfering and forcing them to keep a limit.
Instead of limiting them to a certain balance I suggest they encourage them to cut a personal amount of cash for charity and organizations that need the money the most, like somalia and the third world countries.
With this the economy will be able to balance on a higher grade and decrease poverty;Not mentioning how it could help recover and help prevent the previous money crisis.
In conclusion to your question to "how rich is too rich?" My simple answer is that there is no limit for a person's wherewithal.
I think that no matter how rich people are these days they seem to be extremely overreactive to the way that when they see the needy they go into philosophy mode and then they don't even do anything.
This is a very interesting yet argumantative to talk on. different people may have different view about this matter. "how rich is too rich" well , its never too much for humans .We prefer more to come our way. It is said that all forces have equal and opposite reaction. If u gain some on the other hand you may even loose some . Our human category is always in the greed to get more. Richest people in the world cant sit after earning maybe 10 or 20 trillions one day or the other it has to finish .So in my opinion their isnt a proper and a definite answer i can think of as now.
i think the deeper meaning of the question is that how much does a person need to live.
So basically every person wants more and more but in this hunger for money he becomes selfish.So theres no use of having so much money without any friends or family.
Every person wants to be rich and he can be but most people overspend it or get cheated by giving to other people suppose if a person goes to a wrist watch shop and buys a watch worth 2000 dirhams so he overspends because the salesmen sells a normal watch for 2000 dirhams but he can instead buy a mobile at a cheaper rate.
So in my opinion a person should keep money he needs and can keep the rest as savings and rich people should give some money for charity
so my main point is "money makes you SELFISH"
My answer to this is simple. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TOO RICH. There is not a single law in this world that states how much a person can earn or how much he can have in his bank account. I think the issue arises with HOW these people spend there money. Our society today tells us that there should be equality but that's all just a mentality. Nobody's willing to do that. Let's not be hypocrites, I honestly don't think this world can progress with equality. We all seem to be bound to our values that tell us that we should "share" to be considered "good", when in reality, greed aside, nobody is obligated to do so. Let us all just accept the fact that some people are rich and some are not. We should stop looking at what others have and start focusing on what we have and make the best of it.
Being someone who comes from a family who are financially ‘average’, I’m bewildered by the fact that any human being could own such gargantuan amount of money while millions are suffering from poverty and dying of starvation.
Ahmed, it’s easy to say “Instead of limiting them to a certain balance I suggest they encourage them to cut a personal amount of cash for charity and organizations that need the money the most...” but frankly, how many of us are willing to give away a huge share of our money for the benefit of others? These people are blinded with wealth – it is human nature to be selfish and greedy.
Yes, the wealthy have phenomenal achievements and have put in blood, sweat and tears to attain such amount of money but has it slipped our minds that there are innumerable directors and CEO’s behind desks, who do nothing but give out faulty commands which drives the business and thus, economy, to a horrendous doom, yet they are being paid millions each day. Are we not aware that the wealthiest people are the ones funding wars which result to the deaths of the innocent?
Celebrities, who are of great influence to society, are encouraging this obscenity by owning acres of land, numerous villas and, not two or three, but five luxurious cars which, by the way, are abandoned to accumulate dust due to the celebrities’ hectic life which comes in the package of stardom. Plentiful from certain parts of the world barely get a taste of the slightest fraction of such wealth. Personally, this is an absolutely gruesome thought!
With this knowledge in mind, why in the world should these people be permitted to possess a whole load of stash if it only tarnishes the name of humanity? I strongly believe if owning a fifth of the GDP of the Earth can result to tremendous misuse, limiting one’s wherewithal would be a wise and considerate enforcement.
By the standards of the world as a whole, we are indeed rich. But relatively few of us actually have experience of the world as a whole--at least not direct, in the world's poorer countries, face-to-face with real people subsisting on pennies a day. Most of us are aware of world poverty from a distance, through the media, a step removed emotionally. So what we compare ourselves to, when we define ourselves as rich or poor or middle-class, is the standard of living of our peers and neighbors.
I will go as far to say as that it doesn't matter how rich you are - there is no too rich - it only matters how conscious of your wealth you are and what you choose to do about it.
Humans have ample amount of greed in them-to be stereotypical. Its never enough. It is a startling fact that 10% of people hold 90% of wealth. However, it might as well be beneficial if the Gates and Buffets of this world get rich. The very fact that most people have jobs and that economies are developing is largely because of them. however the bottom line is that no matter how rich they get-they leave Earth empty handed after they die; just as one is born empty handed!
Not everyone will agree with me, but after careful consideration I believe that an individual can be classified as too rich when his regular expenses fail to make a significant dent in his/her bank amount. By this, I don't mean they necessarily have to live on the bare minimum, but rather in extreme cases, such as Bill Gates' where his net worth is far beyond any necessary limit, that it is, indeed, excessive.
As to me, I think a person is classified as too rich once he has more money than he needs for his financial security, in other words to save himself from possible business failure and not set foot in the world of debt.
As to me, I think a person is classified as too rich once he has more money than he needs for his financial security, in other words to save himself from possible business failure and not set foot in the world of debt.
-Sahil Feroz
How Rich is too rich? That is one amusing question that every one should ask themselves. Being rich is NOT the only way to getaway from your predicaments, in the mean time it may be escorted with a set of trouble!
As I read every sentence of the original post, I was startled as to the fact that any one could own such a prodigious quantity of money. In my opinion, people should not earn that much, there are so many other beings that do not get the chance to earn at least half of the amount. Various people around the world who suffer from poverty, lack of resources do not have the chance like we do!
I agree to what Aqilah stated about how it is mother nature to be selfish and greedy. We as human beings have advantages and disadvantages and there will be a time when we have to avoid mistakes; we then may make a better world and a better place.
There is no such thing as 'too rich'. In my opinion, wealth is the result of hard work and attainment (not in all cases, however) and so it would not make any sense to restrict one into a certain amount.
You see, this statement is quite ambiguous. I'm convinced that it shows a lack of equality when there's billions of people starving while other possess uncountable amount of money, that in many cases is undeserved.
Like Edeline said, a person can be classified as too rich when his/her regular expenses fail to make a significant dent in his/her bank amount.
In the end what matters is not how wealthy you are, it is what you wish to manipulate this wealth and how you exploit it.
For my part, the answer to "how rich is too rich?" does not rely on the quantity of millions present in one's bank account, but how one obtains and merits them. I don't deem Bill Gates and Warren Buffet "too rich" due to the fact that they they are rather skillful individuals who have made remarkable innovations. It is not staggering that these two beings have a considerably higher incomes that most actors and actresses. Acting is a skill but im certain that we can all agree that most actors/actresses are overrated and overpaid.
Anyhow, to me it comes down to how you earn your income. I perceive a janitor earning thousands of dollars as too rich and a brilliant mind with the same income too poor.
Before we can begin to determine whether Bill Gates or Warren Buffer should be allowed to be as rich as they are you must consider how they became that way.
Firstly Bill Gates has created microsoft one of the most commonly used applications world wide. He came up with the intellect to create such a masterpiece and had the hard work and dedication to follow suit with it. He dedicated his life to it and it is only fair that he reap it's rewards. Yes, I agree that we must consider those in poverty. It is morally wrong of him to hoard all of that cheddar without considering the poor (if he hasn'). However, it isn't his obligation to do so. Therefore, he shouldn't have to lose his hard earned money, for a something that isn't a crime.
Secondly, a person just doesn't do something and 50 billion dollars just drops out of the sky. No it doesn't happen like that. We must live up to our part. We all of indulged in his products to make him as wealthy as he his, no one forced us to, no one took our money and gave it to him. No, we willingly decided to give him our pay checks in exchange for his services, if we really wanted to, we could have gotten together and used that money for charity purposes instead of buying the latest microsoft office every year. But we didn't, so we are partially to blame and we must remember that.
I swear to God, morality and conscious thought has left us all.
Okay, let's do some math here-
By late November, we will have welcomed the seven billionth baby into a world where the balance between rich and poor is DISTURBINGLY skewed to the poor side. We will welcome that baby, wherever they are born, into a world that has the resources, but has a monopoly imposed on those resources. We will welcome that baby, whoever they are, into a world controlled by the 2%, a 2% that owns a corporate empire where the real workers slave for minimum wage while the rich dine on exquisite cuisine that they can't even finish, riding on the backs of the Horn of Africa, of the Thai women forced into prostitution because they have ~~no other worth~~, of the mothers risking their lives in back-alley abortions so they do not bring in a child they cannot feed into a world where there is no such thing as too rich?
There DEFINITELY is such a thing as too rich. We just can't take off our rose-colored glasses and get off our privileged butts long enough to decide WHAT it is.
*breathes fire*
I definitely think that it’s obscene that while people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have fifty billion dollars in their bank accounts, there are 1.1 billion people who have to fill up jerry cans full of tap water so that they can quench their thirst. It doesn’t make sense how children at the age of five complain about their latest Christmas present not being the latest version of FIFA while others can’t afford actual footballs.
I’m not sure if I know the answer to the question- what do you even consider when thinking of a limit of the money you have to keep? The article mentions that people like Gates have to spend their money and some of that may benefit the economy, but I’m still not entirely sure if that would benefit it as much as the actual money would.
A person would be classified as too rich when they cannot control their money, they don't know who is spending it and who is taking it. They lose count of their money and end up in deep debt.
With a great amount of money comes a great amount of responsibility.
I think people should only be allowed a countable amount, but then again why were accountants made?
In my opinion (which will inevitably lead you to believe that I've sold my soul to the corporate devil), I honestly believe one has every right to exploit his or her abilities to reach the highest point of economic gain achievable. Why? Because if you've worked hard for it, then you DESERVE it. Yes, some may say "But not everybody has the same opportunities." But tell me, is my being any less rich going to feed the poor children in Africa? No. It only means that instead of me, someone else is earning the money. But my having the money and putting it to good use is. My earning that money and investing in global development is. I don't believe in charity: give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime. So at the end of the day, it's not about how much money you have, it's what you do with that money that counts. And if after I've met my moral obligations I still have a few billion in the bank, I see no harm in it!
I do not think there is such a thing as being too rich,someone may own an unbelievable amount of money,but ask yourself who are we to tell someone how much money he should be able to own.
And i know i am going to get a decent amount of criticism for this,with the number of people in the world starving and dying everyday but if someone makes a trumendous amount of money in a legal way then thats his money period.If he decides to do something good with the money like helping less previledged people then thats wonderful,if he doesnt then i say its his money, he earned it and he can do what he wants with it,it basically depends on the persons pesonality.But at the end of the day if a man earns his bread who are we to stop him from eating it.
I personally am on the fence with the idea that someone can be too rich, it entirely depends on the imagination of the billionaire. If the billionaire is a giver, and gives up more than half of his money to charity or to help the government/country, then all is well and the public can feel that he/she deserves the money. However if the billionaire is a tyrant and buys up your favorite football club and changes all the players, or takes control of the what TV channels are broadcasted through the nation, then this billonaire is too rich and something in the hands of law should be done to stop him, regardless of how he earned his money.
of the TV channels that are broadcasted throughout*
Anyone having a bank account with over a billion dollars in it would I consider as being 'too rich'. I mean really, why keep money to rot in a bank when they can be used for more beneficial reasons such as giving it to the poor in the form of food, shelter, medicine and what not? We're on this side of the world with our huge plasma screens, junk food, comfy beds and advanced technology and medicine while people on the other side are dying from starvation, malnutrition, diseases or even climate. I understand if one is saving for their future and future generations and all but if one has enough for a mansion, then surely one would have enough to give. So I'd say each person could own up to about ten million at a time, any more should be donated to charity. Ten million is more than enough to satisfy one's needs for their entire life with some luxury in between.
"If a man earns his bread who are we to stop him from eating it." Brilliant comparison by Nnamdi, and pretty much sums up how I feel about this topic.
If a person is able to make money in a legal way, why not allow them to keep it? How could you come up with a judicial law or charge for people having too much money? "Excuse me Mr. Gates, you have too much money, please allow us to escort you to the station for questioning."
I can hardly see that happening.
well put Yoan,right on point.haha
There is no answer to that question. Because even the richest person in this world owning a large amount of money still would want to make more money. People can say that if you own millions of dollars you are rich,
but this sentence would just enter one ear and leave the other, people are eager now days, a lot is nothing for them.
As said by Sam Harris, "Some Americans have amassed more wealth than they or their descendants can possibly spend." If we take a good glance back at history and if we had the chance to ask each of our descendants' generations, what their idea of rich would be, it would DEFINITELY not add up to our current perception of 'rich'. Even though, all the students in our school come from different backgrounds and further stratifications concerning wealth, we would all have different yet similar perceptions of how rich is too rich, in comparison to a celebrity who swims in a pool of money or a family devastated by utter poverty that only a few of us can truly fathom.
As others have mentioned, meritocracy is an ideal approach to wealth distribution, but I think that society should review on how we look upon the ones who form the ideas, and the ones who manifest them on behalf of those thinkers.
I don't think that redistribution would be effective, but rather cause a greater deal of problems concerning trust and power.
To the question on how much should one person be allowed to keep? I honestly, really don't know. There is no utopian outlook to this question. Either you have equal distribution of wealth that cannot guarantee an equilibrium, or you could have a meritocracy which our world currently thrives on.
Personally, all I'd do in my life would be to work at my best, and to earn my living sincerely, for the mere 70 years ahead. I don't think I'd be much too happy with myself if I was handed crisp notes on a platter every morning along with my watermelon juice.
Post a Comment