If wealth relied on poverty?

Question

It was discovered that one persons wealth relied on seventy thousand people being poor, would republicans and conservatives care?

The question is would they care?

If everyone had loads of dollars they would be worthless - this is basic economics - I hope I don't have to explain this to you folks.

Would they care (if one mans wealth = seventy thousand peoples poverty)?

Answer 1

NO, so sorry. Hard work alone does not any longer guarantee an American a place of security and comfort. Yes, in the fifties when the Middle Class was thriving, but not any more.

A person in this country can get a college education, work hard and long hours, play by the rules, never break the law, and STILL not make it here anymore.

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, and to deny it doesn't change it.

And it's a total LIE to say that Socialism is going to "take" anything away from those greedy, cheating LIARS who whine about it.

What is WOULD do, however, is level the playing field. Which is why they are so terrified of it.

Two of the richest men in the world -Dale Carnegie and Warren Buffett--understood full well where the WEALTH came from.

It came from the people.

And THEY say, "Wealth which is derived from the people, should be returned to the people."

Charity, libraries, schools, museums, as opposed to one person owning 50 cars and seven vacation homes.

What Capitalist pigs will NOT admit is that their wealth comes from the sweat and hard work of OTHERS.

I say PAY THEM A FAIR WAGE FOR IT.

Answer 2

You are viewing that the wrong way.
Wealth is cycled. In other words, a person works his entire life accumulating wealth. He or she builds their wealth during their lifetime.
A young person, one just entering the work force, has no wealth and must earn it during their life. The cycle requires a new generation to come into the work force and earn back the wealth held by the older generation.
It doesn't depend on poverty. It depends on a new younger generation who wants to earn the wealth.

Answer 3

I don't think YOU have thought it through Shrink. Wealth relies on poverty, absolutely. You cannot have without have nots. The question of wealth is a matter of degrees.

As for would they care? That's a very big generally accusation you're attempting to make. You're question therefore is too general to be taken seriously.

Answer 4

Why do you think they want to stop social programs. I mean the cons on here don't realize what the reason is behind it but the ones in congress etc. have their reasons. They aren't just heartless people, well they are but, their real reasons is because they know the more people in poverty the more money they make. Stop helping people = mo' money.

Answer 5

How in the world could wealth rely on poverty? Really think this through, don't just buy into the socialist garbage.

Wealth relies on providing a good or a service and having people pay for it.

There isn't any other formula. If you don't like the pay that your job brings, find something else to do.

Answer 6

So what your saying is that the liberals of the world could end poverty if they would give up there fortunes?

Answer 7

Wealth does not rely on poverty. Wealth can be earned by ingenuity and hard work. Ask Bill Gates. I am a conservative. Like other conservatives, I want to see equal opportunity for everyone. Not "equal outcomes" which is a socialist goal.

Answer 8

If that were true, I would make sure I was the 70,001 person...

Answer 9

no