Is wealth finite or infinite?

Question

I am curious about how there can be two sides to this argument. How is it that some people believe wealth can be created while others believe it can only be redistributed?

I am not personally sure which answer is right. I am looking for proof, or at least well reasoned responses. I am not looking for politics, trash economics, or opinions.

As far as I can tell, arguments that wealth is infinite seem to be poorly reasoned. They generally depend on vague situations which appear true at first glance, such as "If you have a great idea and get people to pay you for it, you are creating new wealth."

On the other hand, the proponents of the finite wealth side seem to use outdated examples that tie wealth to natural resources and the services that support them. Has something changed in the last hundred years that has changed wealth from being a finite thing to a infinite thing?

Answer 1

Is wealth finite or infinite?

Before we ask this question, we need to know what wealth is. Wealth is tangible things that one may produce or acquire. For example, gold is wealth. An abundance of food in a freezer is wealth. A huge hospital full of doctors and supplies is a piece of wealth. A WAL*MART store full of merchandise and personnel is a piece of wealth. Clean drinking water is also wealth. A house is wealth. Generally, the things we call wealth are tangible goods.

Since goods are scarce, and everything is limited, then wealth must be limited also. There is so much gold in the world, and one person cannot own 120% of all the gold on the earth, because 100% is the biggest share anyone could acquire.

Now, of course, wealth can be created, but there's a limitation to that too. The number of gold atoms in the earth is limited, so no one could unearth 120% of all the gold atoms from the earth, because the gold is not infinite. Some things are limited.

If we think not in terms of time, then wealth can be infinite. For example, labor is infinite. People reproduce, so there is a potential for infinite labor. But if we consider the amount of work that all humans could do right now, then we have to say that labor is finite, because there are only a few billion people alive, and they can only do so much.

Guess how much progress we would make if all people everywhere in every country all over the world would work 14 hours a day. Wealth can be created. But then, there's only 24 hours in a day, which limits labor.

Since labor is limited, we need machines. Machines help us produce even more stuff in the same time frame. Computers can do hundreds of millions of calculation per second, while a human can only do 3 calculations per minute maybe. Machines and computers help us produce more, and there are newer, faster, and more efficient machines invented all the time, so we could say that production can be infinite.

The amount of goods is limited, yes, but we have a brain. And we are only limited by what our brains can invent. If no one had invented a computer, then it would not exist today. Our imagination is part of the production equation, so wealth can be infinite.

"To accomplish great things, we must not only act, but also dream; not only plan, but also believe."
— Anatole France

If people were like ants, then there would be no unemployment. There would be no need for redistribution of wealth, because people would produce enough wealth for themselves, so they wouldn't depend on others to create wealth for them.

Those people like the idea of redistribution of wealth who do not produce enough for themselves and depend on others to supply them. They believe that wealth is limited, because they don't count themselves into the workforce. They view themselves as consumers and wealth as finite. The workers who produce wealth view wealth as something renewable, something infinite.

Wealth can be infinite only if we get up and work. Otherwise, we can discuss economics all day long and try to convince each other that it's infinite, but sooner or later we'll run out of wealth and realize that it is finite. ;-)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Socialism is like a dream. Sooner or later you wake up to reality. — Winston Churchill
.

Answer 2

Ok, I was a bit confused by the question but I will give an answer to the best of my ability. In my opinion, wealth can either be created or achieved. There is only so much wealth a person needs, so therefore, it should be redistributed. Wealth in my opinion is not infinite unless you are talking about something other than financial wealth (i.e. I am a wealthy man because I have alot of friends). If one attains wealth in their life and plans properly, I believe wealth can be infinite, so long as its receipiants do the same. New ideas work well as long as they can remain mainstream and not become antiquated. In today's society, things become old very fast as techonology continues to grow. Ok, I'm really trying here. I know you weren't looking for opinions, but thought maybe I could at least speak what was on my mind. Good luck with your answers.

Answer 3

Some of those who believe that wealth can only be redistributed often assume that the only wealth worth talking about is the ownership of natural resources. Since the amount of natural resources is finite, so must be wealth. Others are simply short-termists; they refuse to see that although wealth changes very little from one quarter to the next (and thus can be assumed to be fixed in the short-run), it can change substantially over the lifespan of one generation (not to mention a century).

Those who believe that wealth can be created usually contend that wealth is a product of labor (some would say, labor and capital, but then, capital, too, is a product of labor). Since capital accumulates over time, labor generally becomes more productive, hence, increasing creation of wealth...

Answer 4

wealth is a big word... first break it down.. if you consider wealth as only having alot of money-well it is finite- if its infinite then no one is able to measure it. has anyone ever been able the measure infinitity. no. and i wouldnt go about that task. its finite and it can grow thats why the money supply grows as more people are on the planet because more people spend and make money. i dont like the concept of scarce because it sounds as if there is very little of it. i prefer limited to what we know.

Answer 5

Conservatives worship wealth in itself. Even now, during the term of a Liberal President, the gap between the richest Americans and the poorest is widening every day. The wealthy have seen their incomes raise 18% over the past decade while the lower incomes have fallen. This inequity in income is not a healthy thing and will lead to social disorder.

Answer 6

I would answer infinite, in most cases, and give an example.
Here is my example:
Most people for thousands of years have agreed that owning some Gold, is the same thing as having some wealth.

Now Gold was produced in the early days of the Egyptians {4,000 years ago?} and is still being produced today.

Will the world ever run out of Gold?

No, because apparently there is abundant Gold in a dissolved state in all the oceans of the world.
However the cost of separating the Gold from the sea water makes production not economical.
When the price of Gold reaches say $2,000 per ounce, then maybe it will be mined{?} from sea water.
**********************************************************

Answer 7

Wealth is infinite.

Look at how many new billionaires there are each year. In 2006, the number increased by 102. It's not like everyone else lost $102 billion dollars within that same year.

Answer 8

wealth is a curious thing; it can be produced or acquired from others...!!
It all depends on the kind of wealth...!!!
Contact the wealth preservation firm...!!