a ratio like $1000:1 something like that.
2007-01-04 11:19:02 · 14 answers · asked by Badman5000 1 in Social Science ➔ Economics
we call that Communism its against our beliefs. get an education or a better job.
2007-01-04 11:22:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
They would have to keep their job or be required to get a job or own a business, otherwise services would cease because for a while at least many would not work. But a bottom up approach would have stimulated the economy and the bailouts were Bull Sh*t. I disagree with those that say, where would the money come from? That's easy, the fed just prints it, just like they have been for quite a few years. That's where all this bailout money came from to the tune of a few trillion. It's been noted that it would have been far cheaper and more effective to give the consumers the money, versus bailing out those mismanaged companies who had factories all over the world. The US dollar is already nearly worthless, but yes, the extra spending by the consumer would create inflation.
2016-05-23 04:05:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This question infuriates me. We went to war (albiet a cold war) over the communist ideology. Why dont you go ask a Cambodian who lived through the this ideal state back in the 1970's when Pol Pot try to bring the true meaning of communism to fruition by confiscating all assets. This, in essence, is what you are suggesting just by asking this question. We live in a free market economy in which wealth and capital are distributed to the most productive. That is the way that it should be. Productivity and efficiency need to be rewarded. PERIOD. Any other system is foolish and any system that tries to detract or make a free market economy less free does not belong in this country. Unforutnately, people around the country ask questions like this and try to cure "unbalanced" distributions of wealth by doing exactly what is proposed in your question!!!!!! It is just wrong.
2007-01-04 13:48:32 · answer #3 · answered by paddlingdummy 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No one would get any money, we have federal reserve notes. You take all the federal reserve notes, and I'll take the gold. Our dollor use to be backed by gold or silver, but hasn't been for over 50 years. A dollor used to be worth a dollor, now it is worth about 9 cents or less in buying power.
2007-01-04 11:52:56 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I am sure that not all of "US" money is available in the country, so you would have to clarify world wide or not. I think it would be more than 1000:1.
2007-01-04 13:29:57 · answer #5 · answered by stuckinlove 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
.Just divide $9'000'000'000'000.00 between 300 million, and that's what ya each gotta pay.
Pretty soon, the repoman will knock on America. Meanwhile, Bush is spending like all of the preceding president together, to accomplish nothing but war, and to create incredible wealth to his friends: Oil and war thugs.
2007-01-04 11:21:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
GDP divided by the number of people in the country would be a safe amount to go by.
2007-01-04 11:21:47 · answer #7 · answered by Veggie 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You have to define what you mean by "money". Do you just mean paper money and cons currently in circulation?
2007-01-04 11:22:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
We would all have to pay money considering our country's trillions of dollars in debt.
2007-01-04 11:21:13 · answer #9 · answered by Nolan D 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
We'd probably all be broke because we'd have to pay into the national debt.
2007-01-04 11:21:23 · answer #10 · answered by ♥Lolita♥ 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋