English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In an imbalanced country, as a leader, how would you do it???

2006-08-23 04:04:27 · 18 answers · asked by pisluv 1 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

18 answers

Violent revolution.

"Violence. Violence. The only thing that makes sense."

"Eat the rich. Out of the palace and into the ditch."

2006-08-23 04:06:46 · answer #1 · answered by Mr. October 4 · 0 3

You can't. The fall of communism is a good example that one can not spread evenly a country's wealth. There will always be disparity in all classes of society. Those who follow an idealism that this can be achieved will only fail.

However, there is one method that can at least alleviate the plight of the poor people or the less fortunate (well at least to some). And that is in the setting up of a cooperative. Whether it be engaged in export or in farming or whatever, the idea of a cooperative is to give equal opportunity to all its members.

Take for example a 100 acre farm lot. If you are to distribute it to 10 people each with 10 acres of land to till, everyone would probably have difficulty tilling with a meager resources that each one have. If you set up the 100 acres to 10 people as a cooperative though, the meager resources of each collectively could perhaps buy them a tractor. That would make the land easier to till and most likely have a bountiful harvest.

Hope you got the idea.

Take care.

2006-08-23 11:22:01 · answer #2 · answered by MenudoPie 3 · 1 0

The United States of America is a capitalist nation, and unfortunately capitalism isn't balanced. Communism is based on the principle of everyone having the same amount of wealth. Sure, on paper it looks good, but it hasn't worked in real life yet. So really there is no way to spread the wealth. And this system has brought us the world's best economy, so capitalism works, not communism. However the rich, owners of companies could offer jobs to all the poor people. But they wouldn't be qualified, so it just wouldn't work.

2006-08-23 11:46:28 · answer #3 · answered by YA. 1 · 0 0

The question is, do you JUST want to distribute wealth evenly, or do you also want to keep productivity and employment high?

If the former, you could just go for redistribution. That is to say, take all the wealth in the country and hand it out evenly. The problem is, this doesn't reward people for doing work, so you end up with low productivity and employment rates.

If the latter, I would suggest removing essentially all taxes and placing them instead on economic rent (economic rent is the money a person gets for denying somebody else something they would otherwise have access to). It would appear that this system of taxation would have, among its other beneficial effects, the effect of making wealth more evenly distributed; the poor would be richer and the rich would be poorer (and, more importantly, the rich would also have to work more).

2006-08-23 11:09:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Why would one want to waste wealth by spreading it among the parasites that are either to lazy, to stupid, or to dishonest to make their own money?

What are you? Some sort of socialist retread dressed up as a modern lib-tard?

2006-08-26 23:18:50 · answer #5 · answered by juandos 3 · 0 0

Opinions vary.

Democrats think the best way is to take taxes from everybody, and give out money through social programs. The problem with this model is that it's basically robbing from the rich to give to the poor.

Republicans think the best way is to reduce taxes, eliminate regulations on business, and hope that the economic growth will be enough to stimulate new jobs and increase salaries. The problem with this model is that it doesn't take into account outsourcing, and assumes a certain benevolence by corporations.

So, basically, either the government does it, or it trusts the people to do it themselves. I don't see either one working that well.

2006-08-23 11:18:00 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0 2

You can't spread wealth. The best solution for the poor is not to give them monetary help, but to teach them how to earn those money and provide opportunity for earning. Teach them the skills and then create incentives for hiring the poor.

2006-08-23 11:10:30 · answer #7 · answered by HW 4 · 2 1

you cant spread wealth among the people. communism had that as a goal, but eventually failed.

2006-08-23 11:53:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Catch the unemployed(who do not wish to work) and make them work for maintainance of all the public places.A good way which does not involve forgery in paying taxes.
Salary for all jobs should be made appropriate.

2006-08-23 11:08:14 · answer #9 · answered by madhu v.g 3 · 1 1

instead of cash, you can do credits where everybody would have the same amount of credits. The good thing about it is that the govt would hot have to waste money making money, and if everyone had the same amount of credits, then no one would be poor.

2006-08-23 11:23:27 · answer #10 · answered by james w 3 · 1 0

Make it easier for the private sector to create jobs.

Make sure the public education system was teaching the skills needed to fill those jobs.

2006-08-23 11:06:16 · answer #11 · answered by Vosot 3 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers