and those are those only two choices i.e. it's not open to other answers.
2007-01-25 12:21:06 · 20 answers · asked by randomfletch 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
it is a tricky question because the two are inseparable. so, as a thought experiment. imagine money without power or visa versa.
2007-01-25 12:31:37 · update #1
money..with money you have power
2007-01-25 12:28:51 · answer #1 · answered by donna 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Power is better than money because if you have the power you can definitely make money but it's not always possible to get power with the money. If you care to read history the pages are full with the names of all powerful people not by the names of rich people. Do you expect to see Bill Gate's name in your history book? I rest my case.
2007-01-25 12:32:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both can effect a desired change; however, the reaction of others to money is more predictable, making a desired change more possible. Power is more fragile than money, subject to subtle changes in the perception of those who bestow it. I'd say money is better, as it will buy you bread and give you power as a bonus. Power is not always transferable to others, yet if someone gives you cash, clout (power) is automatically included.
2007-01-25 12:58:58 · answer #3 · answered by earl l 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Symbiosis !!
Money is tangible, power is not, however the effects of power are.
It is possible to have money and no power but it is seldom that one would have power but no money.
On it's own: give me the money. I could have money and stay out of trouble easier than I could with power.
2007-01-25 13:32:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Money, because with money comes power. so with the money you inevitably get both. where as with power some people in power have no or little money so my answer is Money.
2007-01-25 12:35:18 · answer #5 · answered by ~*~AmethystMoonBeams~*~ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
money. because money ALWAYS buys power.
with enough money, i can buy people, business', cities, presidents, countries etc.
if i couldnt buy someone...i could easily pay someone to have them 'convinced'. if a nation doesnt want to listen...it would be easier than taking a whiz to buy a whole lot of nuclear bombs and have them open their ears wayyy wide.
btw len: bill gates is already in the history book, in fact, he is writing history everyday and for many many many days after. do you know the nobel prize? do you what how it came into existence? do a little research! i rest my case! ;)
2007-01-25 15:33:47 · answer #6 · answered by jkk k 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
POWER!! You can too have power without money!! And you can have money without power.
2007-01-25 14:04:25 · answer #7 · answered by Melissa M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Power
With power, you can impose taxes to get money.
2007-01-25 13:35:02 · answer #8 · answered by Matzah Boy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
which is better: money or power?
and those are those only two choices i.e. it's not open to other answers.
2015-08-10 09:31:25 · answer #9 · answered by Rusty 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to history very few had power and didn't have tones of money.
Napoleon
Hitler
Mao Tse tung
2007-01-25 12:37:05 · answer #10 · answered by STA-TOW 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes both are inseperable so are you asking..either money with no power or power with no money?
id rather have power with no money. money is tangible and not lasting. and not everyone responds to money.
there are other things besides money which has no price such as : love, trust, faith , respect etc
2007-01-25 12:53:02 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋