There should be no rich people as long as there is poverty in the world. Do you agree?

Question

There should be no rich people as long as there is poverty in the world. Do you agree?(use the islamic teaching and the prohhets saying)

Answer 1

yes but it is never going to happen

Answer 2

I am not Islamic nor do I ever intend to become Islamic. The answer to your question Is simple. God blesses people with wealth so if it is wrong for wealthy people to exist it would make God a sinner and those who have wealth sinners. Your question is actually a question based on liberal (human secular) atheist teaching from people like Marx and using envy to create class warfare to gain political advantage. You can hear the ideology already starting to be preached for the next presidential campaign. The view point from Judeo/ Christian theology is that God gives wealth to people so they can be vessels of mercy and use the resources well.
Even if used for personal gain, wealth creates goodness. If a person of wealth builds a place to make special boxes and make a profit. He is creating jobs so people can feed and care for their families and that is a good thing. Atheist teaching removes that idea and replaces it with the idea government should take the money and redistribute it. If that is done when the money is gone then that is the end and everyone starves, With capitol investment a sustainable cash flow is created to provide people with long term income.

Answer 3

In an ideal world with perfect humans maybe. I think this was part of the idea behind communism. Communism to me failed because it failed to take the human need for motivation and competition into effect. Many people if they have no incentive other than the collective good will not feel especially motivated to achieve or work really hard. People tend to resent it when they feel they are working hard to support someone is not pulling their weight.

Don't get me wrong, I think our world is in many places too materialistic. We have an extremely top heavy wealth class that has multiple homes around the world, fleets of expensive vehicles, yachts, etc... I think we could do more to be more socially just and equitable. I hope that we are going this direction. Personally, I think that some sort of hybrid socialized economy would be good. That will get me a lot of thumbs down from the hard core capitalists but I see this as a combination of the good things from communism and capitalism. People still get to keep much of what they work and there is incentive if you work hard you will get further but a certain basic level of life is a given for people living in the society. I see this working well in some European countries with much higher literacy rates and much lower crime and poverty than in the US. This benefits the people living in those societies as well because illiteracy and crime drag a society down.

Answer 4

Rich people are the opposite of poor people. If there is no rich then there is no poor meaning everybody is equal. You will never know how to be rich if there is no poor to compare with. No need for Islamic teachings to understand. Just like there will be no beautiful to notice around you unless an ugly one walks by.

Answer 5

I don't agree. Being rich is not bad at all provided the money is not black. In fact, if you are rich and also spend money for the welfare of society, then I think it is a virtue. I have studied Islamic teachings. I have found nothing against being rich.

Answer 6

No. Some people would become poor again if they were given millions because they have no idea how to handle wealth. Others would gain wealth again because they understand how to handle it. I don't especially like that some are very poor but, being on the low end of the income scale myself, I can see that it can be a benefit or a curse depending on how you deal with it.

Answer 7

Why use his teaching when one can look at the example of the early church. They gave to each other as the need came into view, because they loved, they gave to unbelievers, helped to heal the sick although they were ostracized. There were no starving Christians in the beginning and this is where one should look at the state we should be in.

In the end there were more wealthy people but every one was taken care of anyway

Answer 8

Yes, but communism has got itself a bad name. If there really are people or groups of people that could do anything significant about the starving millions, why would they bother? I can't see any answers to this, other than it being in how the individual lives their life.

Answer 9

This is not only impossible, but down right stupid!
The closest to this was tried with Marxism and that failed because this idea works only on paper. In reality it falls on its face!
WHY?

The reason it fails to work is some people make wise choices and manage their money. Being careful what they spend money on and investing for the future. While others will squander ever penny they get their hands on!
Additionally some people will work harder and put more effort into building wealth while others are content to sit back collect welfare and talk in chatrooms, ask stupid questions that generate no money or just waste their time and brain on drugs!

Why should the hard worker and wise investor be punished because of some dim wit that has no desire to better themself but rather wants to be a leach on the butt of secioty?

Answer 10

Sounds like Carl Marx to me.

The problem with that is you are dragging the entire world down to the lowest level. There is always going to be poverty because some people just refuse to try to make things better for them selves. If you don't reward excellence, you won't get it anywhere.

Answer 11

Matthew 19:23-24 Then said Jesus{prophet right?} unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.