Some of you may think that distributing the wealth will help the economy, but it may actually have little or no effect. If everyone had more money, the prices of goods and services would go up accordingly. In the end, no matter how much wealth is distributed, those with a higher income will always have a higher standard of living.
- Status
rockstone1
Distinguished
- Oct 28, 2007
- 436
- 0
- 18,780
Unfortunately, the combined networth of all the billionaires in the world would barely help the economy- if at all. Plus, who do we give it to? Not the government... it burns whatever money it gets.
neoverdugo
Distinguished
- Mar 20, 2010
- 89
- 0
- 18,630
Yeah, give away more than half of your dough to fix the economy that wallstreet, or what i call: "wallcrooks", messed up really bad!! Too much of the US Money is hidden away from the rest of the population. If the people take the "greed", "capitalism", "profit" away from the business practices, the economy would be fixed in no-time.
broketechjunkie
Distinguished
- Jan 14, 2008
- 72
- 0
- 18,640
vaskodogama
Distinguished
- Oct 3, 2008
- 114
- 0
- 18,680
how can ( or cant ) a person have a kind heart and mind like him? gives me the tears when I see what these people do for good
[citation][nom]chickenhoagie[/nom]we need more people like this these days..too much seperation of wealth. people have more money than they can spend these days, which is why i salute people like this to actually realizing this.who needs their own personal jumbo jetliner?[/citation]
Actually, Bill Gates could have a fleet of personal jumbo jetliners and that after donating half of his fortune to whomever.
Actually, Bill Gates could have a fleet of personal jumbo jetliners and that after donating half of his fortune to whomever.
DawnTreader
Distinguished
- Feb 7, 2009
- 67
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]fball922[/nom]How much money do people need? As much as they can acquire from the fruits of their labor. Props to Allen for giving away so much of his money, very honorable, but don't criticize the people who don't, or think that if you can somehow get wealthy people to just give up their wealth all of the problems of the world would be solved... Its their money, they can do with it what they like, and that is OK by me[/citation]
If people were not so greedy the worlds problems would be solved. 80% of the worlds resources are used by 20% of its population. if that 20% gave just 10% to the other 80% of the world, there would be no poverty.
"Its their money, they can do with it what they like, and that is OK by me"
wow is that a lame excuse for letting the other 80% of the world die needlessly.
If people were not so greedy the worlds problems would be solved. 80% of the worlds resources are used by 20% of its population. if that 20% gave just 10% to the other 80% of the world, there would be no poverty.
"Its their money, they can do with it what they like, and that is OK by me"
wow is that a lame excuse for letting the other 80% of the world die needlessly.
I don't really give a rats butt who they donate the money to as long is it remains within the U.S. See every politician as of late seems to have deep pockets to feed the entire world while the country is going down the drain. Problem is the deep pockets are actually the national debt which eventually if ever will be paid by our great grandchildren and there children. We need to keep money and capital here to reinvest in new R & D and create new ways for Americans to make money as a whole. This is not written to be a class struggle statement just that it takes reinvestment in your own country....not giving it all away to someone who might one day use those funds to invade you or go to war with you using the weapons you gave them....to keep on top.
I'd be set up nicely then...
geofry
Distinguished
- Feb 8, 2010
- 67
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]tharkis842[/nom]Just because i didn't elaborate on WHICH people should directly take hold of the money doesn't mean i don't know what i'm talking about. Before you call someone stupid, maybe you should take a look at our current situation, and the 30's. Money hoarding leads to economic downfall in the long run....but there's a point when being wealthy becomes ridiculous. When you have enough to buy pretty much anything you'd ever want in life, you've earned far past your share.It doesn't take a genious to figure out how many jobs could be moved back to the U.S. which would cut production costs, increasing profit margins, and increasing the amount of dollars in the AMERICAN workforce' pockets. Maybe YOU don't have to worry about feeding your family like everyone else, but the rest of us do. When the percentage of people out of work reaches double digits and doesn't fall for over a year, there's an obvious problem. I don't remember saying give everyone $2 million to blow on Corvettes. Maybe you should think before you speak before calling someone stupid.[/citation]
Actually you are pretty much stupid. Money hoarding? Really? Do you think he has a big vault full of gold and gems he goes swimming in? The man is a billionaire, his money is invested to make more money. Which my dim friend is what helps the economy. Giving it all to people who cannot or will not earn their share is what causes economic downfalls.
As far as being able to buy what ever you want in life, you must not have much of an imagination. (Buying Corevettes) With $14B in the bank I'd still be a few hundred billion short of that moon base I've always wanted.
Just to make sure we're absolutely clear...you are an idiot.
Actually you are pretty much stupid. Money hoarding? Really? Do you think he has a big vault full of gold and gems he goes swimming in? The man is a billionaire, his money is invested to make more money. Which my dim friend is what helps the economy. Giving it all to people who cannot or will not earn their share is what causes economic downfalls.
As far as being able to buy what ever you want in life, you must not have much of an imagination. (Buying Corevettes) With $14B in the bank I'd still be a few hundred billion short of that moon base I've always wanted.
Just to make sure we're absolutely clear...you are an idiot.
geofry
Distinguished
- Feb 8, 2010
- 67
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]jamesl[/nom]talk about stupid, you're the dumb one one you seriously believe taking 1 billion from someone who is doing nothing with it and giving 1000 to 1000000 people isn't going to stimulate the economy ? seriously, how stupid can you be ? One million people each buying one thousand dollars worth of items won't help the economy ? if giving each of them 1000 wouldn't effect the economy then I guess taking 1000 away from each of them wouldn't have any effect either, huh?moron[/citation]
Giving $1,000 to a million people would do less than keeping the money where it is, which is invested. Sure that million people would have some spending cash to blow for a weekend, that's about how long it would last, but would barely show up in the grand scheme of things.
There are very few actual poor people in the US, if you are not homeless and starving you are not poor, giving them "a little bit more" will do nothing to improve their lives or the economy. It be wasted on consumer items that have nearly zero payback.
As far as taking a $1,000 away from people wouldn't have much of an affect either. I pay about $1.25hour (a funny way to look at it) in taxes for the pleasure of living and breathing in the US. Another $1000 would amount to $.114hour.
Of course the only thing it would really do is piss people off come election time. Which we are about to see exactly how much in a few more months.
Giving $1,000 to a million people would do less than keeping the money where it is, which is invested. Sure that million people would have some spending cash to blow for a weekend, that's about how long it would last, but would barely show up in the grand scheme of things.
There are very few actual poor people in the US, if you are not homeless and starving you are not poor, giving them "a little bit more" will do nothing to improve their lives or the economy. It be wasted on consumer items that have nearly zero payback.
As far as taking a $1,000 away from people wouldn't have much of an affect either. I pay about $1.25hour (a funny way to look at it) in taxes for the pleasure of living and breathing in the US. Another $1000 would amount to $.114hour.
Of course the only thing it would really do is piss people off come election time. Which we are about to see exactly how much in a few more months.
killerclick
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,563
- 0
- 19,790
If I were rich I wouldn't give money to charities, I'd fund some interesting scientific projects that could transform the world like air travel and the internet did.
killerclick
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,563
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]geofry[/nom]Giving $1,000 to a million people would do less than keeping the money where it is, which is invested.[/citation]
Wrong. Giving $1000 to a million people that need it would stimulate the economy because those million people would spend their money immediately to buy stuff and people who make that stuff would get paid and hire more people and they would in turn buy more stuff from other people and so on. The economy is in trouble when consumer spending falls so people blowing their money on products (whether useful or not) is good for the economy. That's why there are unemployment benefits, not to help the unemployed but to keep the economy going by giving unemployed the means to buy stuff to keep the money flowing.
Wrong. Giving $1000 to a million people that need it would stimulate the economy because those million people would spend their money immediately to buy stuff and people who make that stuff would get paid and hire more people and they would in turn buy more stuff from other people and so on. The economy is in trouble when consumer spending falls so people blowing their money on products (whether useful or not) is good for the economy. That's why there are unemployment benefits, not to help the unemployed but to keep the economy going by giving unemployed the means to buy stuff to keep the money flowing.
r0x0r
Distinguished
- May 9, 2006
- 1,005
- 0
- 19,280
[citation][nom]jamesl[/nom]talk about stupid, you're the dumb one one you seriously believe taking 1 billion from someone who is doing nothing with it and giving 1000 to 1000000 people isn't going to stimulate the economy ? seriously, how stupid can you be ? One million people each buying one thousand dollars worth of items won't help the economy ? if giving each of them 1000 wouldn't effect the economy then I guess taking 1000 away from each of them wouldn't have any effect either, huh?moron[/citation]
Money doesn't solve money problems, applied education does. That's why 80% of lotto winners end up worse off 5 years after winning lotto. They didn't have the financial or emotional intelligence to be able to deal with large sums of money.
You give everyone $1,000 each, and most of them will buy stuff that's not made in the US. Then what happens after the $1,000 is gone? Back to square one.
Wealth isn't how much you have, it's what you can do with what you have, and I can guarantee that nearly everyone you give $1,000 to will not be able to increase it, because most will spend it on stuff they don't need.
Giving money away also breeds an entitlement mentality, which is one of the major factors in America being the way it is now. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a social support system for people who need it, I'm saying that people should realize that they are NOT entitled to the sweat off someone else's brow. The social support system is there because if it were not there the living standard for everyone else would drop significantly.
It's funny whenever an article about a billionaire comes out, because you always get people putting their hands out and expecting some sort of wealth re-distribution into their hands. These are the people who have given up ever trying to obtain wealth, because I guarantee you, if these people were in the opposite position, they would tell those with their hands out to get their own income. If I am wrong, get rich and prove it. The opportunity is there; the world is changing at an astonishing rate. Take advantage of that, get rich, and prove your congruency.
First world countries have libraries and the internet with which to take advantage of. You can research things and network with people who might be able to finance your idea (if you need it). Dell and started out in nothing more than a dorm room. What makes you think you can't do what he did? All he does is think different, and that costs nothing.
The venture capital for Dell was $2,038.29 in 2009 dollars, and if you can't find someone willing to put $2,038.29 into your idea, then you need a new group of friends...which you can find on the internet.
Money doesn't solve money problems, applied education does. That's why 80% of lotto winners end up worse off 5 years after winning lotto. They didn't have the financial or emotional intelligence to be able to deal with large sums of money.
You give everyone $1,000 each, and most of them will buy stuff that's not made in the US. Then what happens after the $1,000 is gone? Back to square one.
Wealth isn't how much you have, it's what you can do with what you have, and I can guarantee that nearly everyone you give $1,000 to will not be able to increase it, because most will spend it on stuff they don't need.
Giving money away also breeds an entitlement mentality, which is one of the major factors in America being the way it is now. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a social support system for people who need it, I'm saying that people should realize that they are NOT entitled to the sweat off someone else's brow. The social support system is there because if it were not there the living standard for everyone else would drop significantly.
It's funny whenever an article about a billionaire comes out, because you always get people putting their hands out and expecting some sort of wealth re-distribution into their hands. These are the people who have given up ever trying to obtain wealth, because I guarantee you, if these people were in the opposite position, they would tell those with their hands out to get their own income. If I am wrong, get rich and prove it. The opportunity is there; the world is changing at an astonishing rate. Take advantage of that, get rich, and prove your congruency.
First world countries have libraries and the internet with which to take advantage of. You can research things and network with people who might be able to finance your idea (if you need it). Dell and started out in nothing more than a dorm room. What makes you think you can't do what he did? All he does is think different, and that costs nothing.
The venture capital for Dell was $2,038.29 in 2009 dollars, and if you can't find someone willing to put $2,038.29 into your idea, then you need a new group of friends...which you can find on the internet.
killerclick
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,563
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]r0x0r[/nom] I can guarantee that nearly everyone you give $1,000 to will not be able to increase it, because most will spend it on stuff they don't need.[/citation]
That's what they're supposed to do. Consumption and production is what stimulates the economy. The fact that Nikes or iPads are produced in China doesn't mean that money stays in China. Money always finds a way to those that deserve it and the more hands it changes along the way the better it is for the economy.
That's what they're supposed to do. Consumption and production is what stimulates the economy. The fact that Nikes or iPads are produced in China doesn't mean that money stays in China. Money always finds a way to those that deserve it and the more hands it changes along the way the better it is for the economy.
With all due respect, I don't have any respect for this guy giving away money NOW WHEN HES ABOUT TO DIE. It clearly shows that if he had even 50% of confidence of living another 10-15 years, he'd just keep the money until then LOL. This is just him getting some recognition as being some nice guy who cared about the world. Yet he kept the $$$ to himself until hes about to die and all of a sudden we hear hes charitable? yea...nice try their old man!
[citation][nom]jamesl[/nom]talk about stupid, you're the dumb one one you seriously believe taking 1 billion from someone who is doing nothing with it and giving 1000 to 1000000 people isn't going to stimulate the economy ? seriously, how stupid can you be ? One million people each buying one thousand dollars worth of items won't help the economy ?[/citation]
Geofry and mackinator have it right here and clearly understand micro/macroeconomics. "Giving" money away will have an effect on the economy - but as short term. It's the constant reinvesting of money that earns/generates interest and creates the "wealth" of a nation as a whole. A balance needs to be maintained (like everything in life) between the consumer and corporate worlds. A problem we ran into when the economy collapsed hard in late 2008 was that banks ran out of money to lend - so the people that needed it to keep their businesses running, couldn't get it. With this guy's fortune parked in banks - this is the lifeblood that keeps that system moving. Small and medium businesses that needed the capital to make money get it, they pay back a share of interest, which goes to the bank and the account holders that helped make the loans possible by parking their money there. So-on goes the re-lending process for the next person that needs money for his/her business.
Now, where the system falls flat on its face, is when these loans are made out to irresponsible people that have no chance of paying back the loans (and default on them) or just cannot refuse themselves from over-purchasing luxuries they DO NOT need - like where we're at now (see debt explained later). Where the system doesn't work at all in you example, would be if Mr. Allen was an old Scrooge McDuck here and just had a large gold-mined vault in his mansion where he parked all of his wealth. The only way that "spreading the wealth" amongst X amount of people could possibly help, would be if these recipients were to pay down debt instead of say put a down-payment on a new car with it. It's the actual inescapable debt that drags down society (very easy to reach a point of no return with a wall of interest pushing against you), not entirely about how much income you can bring in or have donated to you.
Geofry and mackinator have it right here and clearly understand micro/macroeconomics. "Giving" money away will have an effect on the economy - but as short term. It's the constant reinvesting of money that earns/generates interest and creates the "wealth" of a nation as a whole. A balance needs to be maintained (like everything in life) between the consumer and corporate worlds. A problem we ran into when the economy collapsed hard in late 2008 was that banks ran out of money to lend - so the people that needed it to keep their businesses running, couldn't get it. With this guy's fortune parked in banks - this is the lifeblood that keeps that system moving. Small and medium businesses that needed the capital to make money get it, they pay back a share of interest, which goes to the bank and the account holders that helped make the loans possible by parking their money there. So-on goes the re-lending process for the next person that needs money for his/her business.
Now, where the system falls flat on its face, is when these loans are made out to irresponsible people that have no chance of paying back the loans (and default on them) or just cannot refuse themselves from over-purchasing luxuries they DO NOT need - like where we're at now (see debt explained later). Where the system doesn't work at all in you example, would be if Mr. Allen was an old Scrooge McDuck here and just had a large gold-mined vault in his mansion where he parked all of his wealth. The only way that "spreading the wealth" amongst X amount of people could possibly help, would be if these recipients were to pay down debt instead of say put a down-payment on a new car with it. It's the actual inescapable debt that drags down society (very easy to reach a point of no return with a wall of interest pushing against you), not entirely about how much income you can bring in or have donated to you.
Computerrock1
Distinguished
- Nov 17, 2009
- 884
- 0
- 19,060
Why are their some many a$$h#^%@ on this forum? This is a great thing, it benefits not only the American people, it helps the world all around. Everyone who's pessimistic about this has major issues and probably is richer than me. ($12,000 in debt and jobless) and this won't aid me, but who cares?!?!
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
[citation][nom]chickenhoagie[/nom]who needs their own personal jumbo jetliner?[/citation]
John Travolta?
[citation][nom]rockstone1[/nom]Unfortunately, the combined networth of all the billionaires in the world would barely help the economy- if at all[/citation]
It's not going to the economy, it's going to charity
[citation][nom]zachary k[/nom]so, the Microsoft billionaires are giving money away while Steve jobs is..... doing what now?[/citation]
He is selling you a phone that will chew $2500 from you over it's contract, and to make up for a serious hardware flaw he is giving you a case that some kid in China has sewn together with his teeth for about a nickel.
[citation][nom]Computerrock1[/nom]Why are their some many a$$h#^%@ on this forum? This is a great thing, it benefits not only the American people, it helps the world all around. Everyone who's pessimistic about this has major issues and probably is richer than me. ($12,000 in debt and jobless) and this won't aid me, but who cares?!?![/citation]
Because they are short-sighted, selfish and stupid.
If the money that Paul Allen donates is what finally cures Cancer, or eradicates Malaria, or Diabetes, or the common cold then the world will sing their praises the same way they do Alexander Fleming (if you don't know then look it up).
John Travolta?
[citation][nom]rockstone1[/nom]Unfortunately, the combined networth of all the billionaires in the world would barely help the economy- if at all[/citation]
It's not going to the economy, it's going to charity
[citation][nom]zachary k[/nom]so, the Microsoft billionaires are giving money away while Steve jobs is..... doing what now?[/citation]
He is selling you a phone that will chew $2500 from you over it's contract, and to make up for a serious hardware flaw he is giving you a case that some kid in China has sewn together with his teeth for about a nickel.
[citation][nom]Computerrock1[/nom]Why are their some many a$$h#^%@ on this forum? This is a great thing, it benefits not only the American people, it helps the world all around. Everyone who's pessimistic about this has major issues and probably is richer than me. ($12,000 in debt and jobless) and this won't aid me, but who cares?!?![/citation]
Because they are short-sighted, selfish and stupid.
If the money that Paul Allen donates is what finally cures Cancer, or eradicates Malaria, or Diabetes, or the common cold then the world will sing their praises the same way they do Alexander Fleming (if you don't know then look it up).
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Recommended Graphics Card (Max budget ~$500)
- Started by deathbysalt
- Replies: 5
-
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 31
-
Question Need help with ssd purchase please?! How is the one i have?
- Started by edp213
- Replies: 1
-
Question Secondary HDMI port on graphics card not working + more
- Started by Solkorate
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram