Distributing wealth equally

[Dom Tuk]

I find this concept bizarre but there are people who would like equality in this world by redistributing wealth equally. Assuming that it is possible to do it, what are the arguments against redistributing wealth so that everyone has the same amount.

[Chillum]

It would eradicate the incentive to create it in the first place, which in turn would lead to the stagnation of our development as a species. There's also the human element which means that not all of us are willing nor happy to be reliant on others, but prefer to take responsibility for our own lives.

[elgroucho]

Chillum's answer is spot on. However, it is worth mentioning that people who believe in a redistribution of wealth don't generallly want everyone to be totally equal, and have all competition etc quashed. The tend to believe in a fairer society with some wealth redistribution to help the poorest people in society.

[SASHAGREEN]

i think it's sad that their are starving children out their with no home, but famous rich people will spend 2 million on a home. they throw money away like it's nothing! i would clasify myself as middle class, and i'm grealfull for what i have. it's not much. i think it would be nice to have everyone be an equal. i try to give money to charities, and to my church when i can. i wish i could do more. it breaks my heart to see those kids on tv! i just want to reach out and hug them and give them all the food in my house. kids don't understand why they have nothing, but another kid has money to burn. the money we pay sports players is ridiculous! as with the hockey strike in the us. they want more money, and bennefits. they should look around and feel fortionet for what they have!

[CiderMonkey]

I agree with you sashagreen. i dropped a peanut on the floor earlier and just thought 'oh well' and then remembered a picture i saw in the paper this morning of a child in Sudan who'd collapsed through starvation. A woman was speaking of feeding her children leaves as there was nothing else to eat - these leaves made them ill but it is better that than die. It really hit home how unequal it is that we waste food where others don;t have it one day to the next.

It's a nice idea that we could redistribute the wealth so everyone has some, but i don't know that it would solve the problems. There's no way it could happen either.

[flaming]

I agree, a fairer share of the earth's resources and the financial rewards gained from using - correction, over-using - its bounty. 

Starting here in the U.K. the obvious thing the Government could have done at the start of the last property boom was block mortgages for buy-to-let, especially one or two bedroomed properties. These are the very places that new people getting a first home would be able to afford, yet proportionately those properties were the ones which quickly became scarce and over-priced.  One can build any number of new houses, but if at least half of those are snapped up by people who can get a buy-to-let mortgage, what's the use of the number having been built ?  It will never ease the situation if the housing stock is diminished so, with houses usually let out at rents which only overseas visitors can afford.  The latter is  true in my neck of the woods, anyway.  Another thing is that young families are denied living where their families live, in small towns and villages, which are peppered by outsiders' second homes which are empty for a lot of the year.  I do think there is some case for property rationing here in the U.K. as there will never be enough to go round;  everyone values some green spaces left in between the new builds.

I think it is not possible to redistribute all wealth, as so much of it is on paper, or tied up in investments and/or companies in other countries, but what is possible is a level playing field created so that all have an equal chance with a good education and a first home.  What is done with that good start  is largely up to an individual's determination and aims.

Our Government says it stands for that, especially looking after 'key workers',  and yet I see little evidence of  it  being practised.

[Andy008]

Buy Economics by John Sloman, you can get it off Amazon, nice one.

[flashpig]

I don't believe in spreading wealth entirely equally, but I don't believe that there needs to be a Darwinist take on money, the survival of the fittest etc. because the fittest seem to be those that have the most money, and it would be ruthless and mindless to deny people the compassion that it took our monkey ancestors thousands upon thousands of years to conceive.

The money in this world seems to be massively unbalanced, and the rich seem to get richer, the poor poorer, and you're right there seems to be no way to get it equally balanced, nor do I think it should be. Some work. Some people do far, far more work than others. Some are incapable of doing work, some are lazy and choose to scrounge of benefits, or some choose to do no work because they let their money work for them.

There seems to be a small way to redress the balance slightly and fairly, without impoverishing the rich or enrichifying the workshy, which I don't think anyone wants.

I am thinking specifically of the 'nanny state'. How many people could afford nannies? My parents couldn't, but they didn't mind and I won't mind spending tax money paying for the state to look after those that can't afford nannies, butlers, etc.

It annoys me each time I hear a nannied 'nanny state' person on a phone in. I reckon if it weren't for the phrase 'nanny state' most people would have no idea what a nanny was.

[oxeyedaisy]

if wealth was distributed their are certain types of people that would waste their share and end up with nothing or very little..so then you are back to where it began some with some without..its like when some people win the lottery its spend spend spend..and then they are skint again...

[acw]

8 answers and no-one has talked about Communism yet!?!  Or capitalism of course!!  I'd suggest to you, Dom Tuk, that reading Animal Farm by George Orwell may provide you with some answers.  It's a very short book so it won't take you too long.  :-)

[Dom Tuk]

I have read the book a long time ago acw. I am not so sure if you were being facetious by hinting that it would not take me long to read it. if you were being sarcastic then I am offended.

[acw]

Please don't carry over bad feeling from the other thread!  I really wasn't meaning to be rude.  As you have read it you will know that it IS a short book.  I am not suggesting that you are a slow reader, more that you are no doubt a very busy person and therefore may not have time for huge amounts of research into this topic.  No offence was intended.  I promise! :-)

For the record - your insulting comments to me in the other thread WERE offensive.  But I can't be a*sed to report you. 

[Dom Tuk]

I apologise acw if i caused any offence in the other thread.

[acw]

Ok, :-) Let's try not to get so wound up by each other in future then.  I honestly wasn't meaning to be rude here.  In the other thread, I don't appreciate being made to feel that other users think I'm either stupid, or wrong in my opinion.  I just don't believe that an opinion can ever be wrong.  Mis-informed perhaps, but something so subjective as an opinion can never be wrong.  This applies to people's opinions in this thread here as much as any othe. 

[Toxic Guts]

I fully agree with helping out those who CANNOT help themselves, but what about those who WON'T help themselves?? - There are far too many people nowadays who expect handouts for doing absolutely nothing, and they get them too!!!!

Example - My wife and i both work full time, and always have. We have never been out of a job or "unable to find work". If you are willing to work, there is plenty of ot out there. We can only just afford to buy our own house, both drive around in old battered cars and rarely have any money left at the end of the month to do anything other than the odd trip to the coast.

My next door neighbours however - They are both fully able bodied yet for some reason don't have jobs. They have 4 (very badly behaved) children who all seem to have the latest gadjets and toys.They have 2 virtually brand new cars between them and go on holiday at least twice a year. They rarely spend a night in and can even afford to pay for a babysitter most nights whilst they are down the pub spending money that somebody else (you and me), has had to work for!

So if we were going to start ensuring everybody had equal amounts of money, maybe we should start by making sure that those people who actually provide it in the first place have their fair share too????

I had better stop now or else i will rant on forever about this topic. As you can probably tell it angers me deeply. Surely its time the government took action against the SCROUNGERS that make those who are genuinely in need look bad!