Who would you save and why?

Question

There is a flood coming. There are 2 separate communities. You can only save 1. You can't save half of one and half of another. You must decide which to save.

Community 1 is comprised of welfare recipients, none of whom have jobs. Most are poorly educated. Economically speaking, they contribute nothing to the community.

Community 2 is comprised of business owners and achievers. All have jobs. In fact, they are the owners of all of the businesses in the area. Economically speaking, they contribute everything to the community.

You decide who lives and who dies. Remember, it is an all or nothing choice.

Answer 1

Community 2. They will rebuild, stronger and better, they won't wait for help and they won't wait for direction, because they are motivated, ambitious and cognizant of what it takes to create something worth having, keeping and fighting for.

This isn't a question about keeping the smart and rich over the ignorant and poor. It is about selecting people with ambition over people who have none.

If I am going to survive a flood I want someone standing next to me who is going to fight as hard as I am, who won't give up (because I never will), and who will find the opportunities in places I may overlook. In fact, I want to be standing with people who can outfight me, outthink me, out work me and match me strength for strength; idea for idea, and come up with creative solutions to problems. I want people around me who will understand the power of positivity and are willing to see things through.

I do not believe community 1 has anyone in it that I would want on my team. I don't believe anyone in community 1 knows what being on a team means, what creating something and making something work means. All I see community 1 as is a group of people who gave up and accepted the leftovers that society tossed them.

This answer is, of course, based upon the premise that you have discloses all of the facts about both groups.

Answer 2

I would save community 1 and let community 2 save them selfs they are smart and will get out in time as cvommunity 1 will freak out when the water comes and try to blame everyone but themselfs...

Answer 3

If I was really trying to help the most people, I would go for the second group. Neither group is "better" than the other just because of money, but the second group will help the most people recover after the flood passes.

Answer 4

Save Community 1.
Because Community 2 doesn't know how to survive on nothing. After a flood, there will be nothing to live on. So, Community 2 will die off anyways.

Answer 5

Community #2.

They are going to be more successful in being able to rebuild than community #1.

Answer 6

#2. It's not that #1 is bad but after this flood passes, achievers will be the best people to have if you want to rebuild.

Answer 7

It is a difficult situation that one would pray not to even experience, but considering the continuity of the community i would choose community 2.

Answer 8

Community # 2. They have all the business to keep everything going. Food, fuel, cloths, building materials, etc. You have to keep the economy going even if it cost a few lives. sorry, but community # 1 would drown.

Answer 9

I would save community #2 as they will have the strength to better their situation, find resources, and rebuild. They would probably work with me to save themselves and they would not be totally reliant after-wards to recover. Bottom line: I would want to save those that would do something with a second chance. Ask yourself if you would save the car that works or the car that is up on blocks, and people wouldn't be as indignant that you want to save the working vehichle.

Answer 10

I would choose half of community #1 and #2. Too many reasons to explain why I choose that.