Is it right for someone to have millions of dollars when some people die from hunger?

Answer 1

Honestly I have no idea. I mean, if you're speaking from a moral standpoint, moral value shouldn't be measured by one's emotional reaction to something, which, in this case would be the sum of money. Who's to say it isn't right to have millions of dollars but then it's okay to still be wealthy but not QUITE a millionaire? Morals are black and white; either you should provide you and your family with JUST ENOUGH and give the rest to charity, or you should be rich and live in lavish mansions but still give some money to charity like Bill Gates or Oprah. The answer to that I don't know, but I do know that if you're going to make the case that it is morally wrong for people to have millions of dollars when others have none, by that standard it should apply to anyone beneath that financial level who is living "comfortably" above the middle-class range, as well. Personally, if I ever grew rich, it would be very difficult not to spoil myself.

Answer 2

There is no clear cut answer for your question.
It depends on what the millionnaires and the poor are doing with their situation. If the millionnaires do not do charity and help their society the best way they can,- since they have the "resources" and the poor give up and get into a "self fulfilling prophecy" trap then it is not fair or right.
But if everyone does their part it can work out.
People that have the money have it because they are hardworking, intelligent and have the willpower (in healthy cases) that means they can use that to the benifit of others around them that have the need and turn it into something constructive for the "whole".

Answer 3

Absolutely! The person with millions probably worked hard, made good decisions, pays taxes (which helps others), spends money buying things (which helps others), and employs people (which helps the people).

People dieing from hunger either chose to be in that position (homeless in the US) or were born into the situation (Africa) by parents who were too stupid not to breed and too stupid to think about the future of their kids. Idiots in Africa and other starving countries, are almost always deeply rooted in very old habits and ridiculous beliefs that keep them in poor conditions. They need to become industrialized and produce a domestic product so they can feed their people.

Besides, if you took all the money away from the rich, there would be no incentive to work hard and to succeed. So, pretty soon everyone would be poor because no one would try to get ahead fearing they would loose what they gained.

I'm certainly not a fan of the filthy rich because I know I will never be rich, but I really can't stand tax-and-spend liberals who want to "government program" the country into pure middle-class. Things like big government, unions artificially inflating incomes, and high taxes are bad news. Then again, filthy rich big-businesses outsourcing jobs just to make an extra 1 or 2% sucks too.

Answer 4

Honestly no I don't think it's right. I would LOVE it to be like Star Trek. But it isn't{BTW wasn't directing the Star Trek thing at anyone. I Love Star Trek and I wish it could happen}and the sad thing is...it never can be. We, as a species are a very caste based species. Or Darwinesque if you will. Survival of the Fittest. I am more Important therefore more precious. More valuable. Whether it be of material or spiritual goods there will Always be a first. I'm thinking very hard right now what I can say to elaborate my stance but can't. People are people...

Answer 5

I am sorry, but the question of right or wrong does not enter into this. Neither has the person who has the millions of dollars caused the poverty of the starving person, nor has the starving man caused the rich person to become richer.

Answer 6

No. Now, you decide who has to give up what, and how you re-distribute all that wealth and property to those who truly need it. Uh-uh-u-uh, no corruption, now. Besides the problem of corruption, how do you invent a system for the redistribution of wealth that's a)fair to everyone, and b) doesn't eat up all that wealth in bureaucratic and infrastructure costs? These questions make it easier to see why communism failed and socialism is problematic. What we need are tighter communities in this "global village". Tight knit groups, like religious communities or extended families can make sure their members don't starve, and if they find they have surpluses, they can distribute them to other groups rather than individuals.

Answer 7

Well, no to a certain extent; yes to a certain extent. NO: If the one with millions of dollars got it from just sitting at home like winning a lucky draw or something. Obviously they do no deserve the money. But yes if they worked hard for the money. Then they deserve it.

Answer 8

no, it is terribly terribly wrong

and it is wrong of us to allow it

it is our duty to force people to give to save lives

we should have made it illegal long ago, to starve people by not giving when we have billions

we are very wicked to sit back and allow such terrible terrible things - it is just as bad as hitler starving people in concentration camps - exactly the same - the countries are prisons that people cannot leave to save themselves by hunting for better land - it is just as bad as starving someone locked up in your attic - it is only our self-flattery that makes it impossible for us to see how evil we are

we are being extremely selfdestructive, wasting humanity wasting happiness

there is enough for everyone to have US$75,000 a year per family - the family working average hard earns US$75,000 a year - plenty and peace - instead we have extreme misdistribution, extreme theft of earnings, extreme overpay and underpay, which causes extreme violence, which escalates endlessly, and has escalated war and wepaonry for 1000s of years to the door of extinction, planet death, nuclear winter, triple iceage

it is only our extreme stupidity and cupidity that prevents us seeing how much we are hurting ourselves

getting common sense into people is the hardest job in the world

see my other answers and questions for a complete plan of sanity peace and 100fold happiness

Answer 9

that's capitalism. if you want everyone to have the same then you have communism or socialism. We're heading that way, with the elimination of our middle class we'll just have poor and poorer, with an aristocracy.

Answer 10

Isn't that like asking if it is right to have two arms and legs when others are amputees? So you will cut yours off to be fair?