Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

OK, economics and social reform question -

If all the wealth in the US (or whatever country you live in) were redistributed somehow instantaneously so that everyone had an equal share, and the laws provided equal opportunity for all, how long would it take for the stratification that we presently see - rich, poor, etc. - to return?

1- within a single generation
2- 2-3 generations
3- we'd finally live in a world where everyone is equal, it would never end.

2-3 Generations.

why do you think that? why not faster, or slower?

The laws do allow equal opportunity for all

Second, how is it fair just to take away the money that somebody worked hard for and to give it to some jerk who dropped out of high school

Originally posted by docb77
OK, economics and social reform question -

If all the wealth in the US (or whatever country you live in) were redistributed somehow instantaneously so that everyone had an equal share, and the laws provided equal opportunity for all, how long would it take for the stratification that we presently see - rich, poor, etc. - to return?

1- within a single generation
2- 2-3 generations
3- we'd finally live in a world where everyone is equal, it would never end.


I say 2-3 generations, it takes awhile to develop "significant" wealth unless you have a chunk of change to pool from. In which case might I ask are you also erasing business relationships with this new platform?

Originally posted by Grimm22
The laws do allow equal opportunity for all

I had to put it in as an assumption so that it was understood no matter what the readers view of present governmental systems was.

Originally posted by Grimm22
Second, how is it fair just to take away the money that somebody worked hard for and to give it to some jerk who dropped out of high school


Wouldn't be fair at all, but this is just a hypothetical social experiment. I'd guess that the worker would be rich again fairly quickly, and the drop-out would be poor again fairly quickly, don't you?

Originally posted by Soleran
I say 2-3 generations, it takes awhile to develop "significant" wealth unless you have a chunk of change to pool from. In which case might I ask are you also erasing business relationships with this new platform?

sure, assume equal starting positions in this hypothetical rat race of life.

Originally posted by docb77
sure, assume equal starting positions in the rat race of life.

Yes I like this race, then I say 2-3 generations to come up with some of the so called "elite" rich we have today.

Then again our entire system would change as well as what weould consider elite.

At the end of the day I'd bet my money that a significant portion of the "working" elite would end up back on top. Hopefully that bet would put me up there with them, I'd be betting my money for their ventures to work with me in it

Honestly, im guessing in 10-20 years big time CEOs and whatnot will be close to extinction.

Small Bussiness's are what run America, not big bussiness.

Of course places like Wal-Mart are a threat to our ecomomy

Pretty fast, people that never had money will try to spend a lot of money, people that had a lot of money will try to earn money. Prices will skyrocket and in the end the rich people of now will probably become rich again, at least those that worked hard for it will... People that just got the money from their parents are screwed.

Originally posted by Grimm22
The laws do allow equal opportunity for all

Second, how is it fair just to take away the money that somebody worked hard for and to give it to some jerk who dropped out of high school

Is it fair that an American company, who employes American workers, most of whom are hard working and competant, and then sells it's products in America, eliminates those American jobs and moves them to China all so the CEO can get a$100 million bonus and the stock might go up 5%? Fukk NO!

Originally posted by Grimm22
Honestly, im guessing in 10-20 years big time CEOs and whatnot will be close to extinction.

Small Bussiness's are what run America, not big bussiness.



That's total and utter crap. The trend in the business world for the last 20 years has been merge, merge, merge, with the big guy eating the little guy. If anything in the next 10-20 years corporations will be fewer in number and their operations bigger than ever.

Money should be replaced by a green beam bar like a thermometer, but instead of temperature it measures our expenses. This feature should be applied on a card right where the scanning line is. It is accurate and precise. Care to take the risk by ignoring this advantage and see what time has in store? Be my guest.

Originally posted by Fishy
Pretty fast, people that never had money will try to spend a lot of money, people that had a lot of money will try to earn money. Prices will skyrocket and in the end the rich people of now will probably become rich again, at least those that worked hard for it will... People that just got the money from their parents are screwed.

Dear god I wish that were true

F***in Paris Hilton

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
Is it fair that an American company, who employes American workers, most of whom are hard working and competant, and then sells it's products in America, eliminates those American jobs and moves them to China all so the CEO can get a$100 million bonus and the stock might go up 5%? Fukk NO!

You obviously didnt watch the Wal-Mart episode of South Park

Sell everything stores like Wal-Mart run small bussiness's out bussiness because they cant afford to lower their prices like Wal-Mart who pretty much just overstock on the product.

Supply and demand is what our economy runs on and when all the supplying is done by one comapny that kills the smaller comapaines

your using Southpark as a source?!?

hysterical

Originally posted by docb77


your using Southpark as a source?!?

hysterical

Hey it makes good point

Seriously, Matt and Trey arent stupid

Originally posted by Grimm22
Hey it makes good point

Seriously, Matt and Trey arent stupid

While I think that big corporations do have their place, I agree that extremes are bad. I wasn't dissing your point, just the source. (there are more credible people who say the same thing)

Originally posted by docb77
While I think that big corporations do have their place, I agree that extremes are bad. I wasn't dissing your point, just the source. (there are more credible people who say the same thing)

I know

South Park sounds like an awful source but they make good points on that show

One generation.
Take doctors and lawyers and people who can play the stock market. In a matter of 20 years they would be considerably wealthier that they would be when distribution took place.
Then you've got your people who do the rest of America's jobs. They stay in their middle to upper middle class range.
Next, the people who blow their money on alchohal and gambling. Poor.

This if course, excludes the poor who work. They whould have their distrubution money and depending on how much their job payed, they would fall into one of the middle class ranges.
After a decade or two, the money blower's children would be the working poor.

More info - according to wikipedia, if we divided all the money in the US amongst all it's citizens everyone- man, woman, and child, would get $30,000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply#United_States

Well, it's a nice idea. But if we're approaching this question while discounting the reality of what would happen to the economy then it wouldn't take anywhere near a generation to return to the current levels.

If everyone had $30,000 then thirty grand wouldn't be a lot of money. The price of living would skyrocket to the point where anything you might pay a hundred bucks for today would cost you $1,000 after the redistribution. Wealth redistribution is a nice idea, but a bad practice.

I was watching a show on Showtime where they give a homeless guy with a drug problem and no real work ethic $100,000 and in less than a year he's spent most of it on partying, women, a couple of cars and an apartment. If I recall correctly, the last info provided was that some 8 months after he got his money, he had less than $5000 bucks left.

During the show, he said repeatedly that his family could go to hell for telling him to get a job, invest some of the money and stop blowing what he had left. His excuse for not getting a job was that he had lost so many of his teeth from living on the streets for so long. It was really a sad situation, because I had high hopes for the show. That it might justify some of my more positive thoughts on the poor and homeless. While I know not all of the poor and homeless are in such a situation because of arrogance and drug habits, the ones that are apparently can't be helped. Look at the ones who are poor because life has dealt them an unfair blow. But this guy was just a piece of shit. Had they given the money to a guy that wasn't a professed drug addict, then they might have justified my feelings. They should have given it to a poor mother with two kids and actually done some good.