I ask this question to provoke thought.
2006-10-27
05:34:05
·
16 answers
·
asked by
Weldon
5
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ Philosophy
EmaM, the communist used the masses to rob the rich an powerful but the only think that changed for the poor was who held power. Millions were murdered.
2006-10-27
08:09:06 ·
update #1
Goswin,the rich got rich because the consciously or unconsciously work within certain laws of prosperity. In a nutshell,Life and prosperity are like muscle strength,use it or lose what you have.
2006-10-27
08:13:19 ·
update #2
01winged,the rich have taken opportunity and used it this begets more opportunity.
2006-10-27
08:15:38 ·
update #3
Josh you are right the big factor is knowledge of how prosperity works. one shoulh quit blaming others. start seeking answers.
2006-10-27
08:18:20 ·
update #4
The difference is 'knowledge'.
2006-10-27 06:23:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Saffren 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
The rich have an attitude that makes them so. If you really want to be rich no matter what the cost, you will get so. Nobody can get rich by their own work, in the long run other people will be harnessed to do the actual work. Rich people can be generous to their friends but not to their workers, maybe not even fair. Always try to add workload while cutting paychecks. That`s why the U.S is losing jobs to china and other developing countries. And learning from their mistakes in the western world, third world will never be able to pay for their kids`s education or have a car or significantly raise their standards of living in any way. May sound cynical but this is the way things are now, I hope future will show Me some creative thinking in this area.
2006-10-27 12:59:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Goswin 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well I don't know how, but here's some logic:
The rich now have an even greater resonsibility and ability to help the poor. They can prove their decency and merit by helping with what they have earned. There are some who obviousely don't deserve their wealth because they flaunt or hoard it.
This is why some belive in a religion that offers eternal condemnation of the evil, because nobody can really do anything to stop them without jeapordizing their own integrity in our modern, corrupt society.
2006-10-27 15:38:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by teh_popezorz 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its because the rich are getting richer and the poor staying still is being looked upon in perspective. The poor look poorer compared to the rich.
2006-10-27 12:36:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by The One Truth 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Maybe the rich are selfish, and the poor care more about others than themselves. I believe this is sometimes the case.
I don't think I'll ever be rich, cuz I like giving to others.
It is in giving that we receive. - St. Francis
2006-10-27 12:39:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Joy_Brigade 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it will always be that way.
The changes get made, since the rich have a lot of money I think they control how the changes go. I.E., tax breaks and such.
2006-10-27 12:36:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by purplejoyv 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
wealth and poverty, like everything else in life are not objective facts but fluid states of consciousness, and may not have anything to do with money. I don't have a lot of money, but I am the wealthiest woman I know. I could have a lot of money if that's where I put my attention, but other things are more important to me.
2006-10-27 13:08:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by shine_radiantstar 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's because rich people are good at getting rich, but the poor people are not.
2006-10-27 14:31:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by jimmy_siddhartha 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because some people know how to use money and others don't. Simple as that. There are traps out there that keep people in poverty (cigarettes, alcohol, Rent-A-Center, National Cash Advance, Bingo!, etc).
2006-10-27 13:45:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by zia269 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The rich can afford to hold on to their money, the poor can't.
2006-10-27 15:08:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sophist 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because we're not Communists. If we were, everyone (give or take a few leaders and their friends who would have more) would be looked after, and have enough to live on.
2006-10-27 12:50:16
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋