Do you believe that if on a Sunday we distributed all the money evenly that it would be back where it was...?

Question

in the first place by Friday?

Hugs 'n Kisses!!! '08

Answer 1

To Socrates point - I like the "making leaders live in the same conditions as the poorest of their constituents" (paraphrased) idea, but then why would anyone run for office?

Interesting question.

Answer 2

Take longer but it would happen as sure as the sun comes up

Answer 3

No.  I'm too frugal to blow that much money that fast.  If all the wealth in America were to be redistributed evenly, my personal wealth will increase substantially.  It would take much longer than a week for me to spend that much.

Answer 4

Not that quickly but quickly.

Answer 5

very interesting. they would not get one penny back from me. i would exchange it for euros and bury it in the backyard and guard it with a shot gun and a bulldog.

the terrorists are headquartered in washington d.c.

Answer 6

Actually, if you took all of the money in the world and evenly distributed it then by Friday no one would be using money.  We would be bartering with whatever goods we had.  The act of redistributing the money like that devalues it to the point of it becoming worthless.  Why use something as a currency if it can just be taken away from you and be given to someone else?  If that is the case then use something as currency that is also useful for something else.  Like chickens.  You can trade them for goods or eat them.

Now, there is some point to the idea that some of the rich will be rich again and probably a lot of the poor will be poor again in a certain amount of time if everyone were suddenly put on an even level.  Some people are just better with money than others.  Look at lottery winners who won enough money to last them their lives and a few years later they are on welfare.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Sav...

There are other lottery winners and people who have come into large amounts of money who have lost it all.

By the same token, there are some people who have lost everything and then rebuilt to where they were.  Some people are good with money and a lot of people are not good with money.  Having a lot of money today is no guarantee of having a lot of money in a year.

Answer 7

No.  Not by Friday.  Human history shows a repeating pattern of slow accumulation of wealth in the hands of a wealthy few until a critical point is reached where the poor simply become too poor and numerous to carry on as they are, whereupon they rise up and redistribute the wealth rather suddenly and violently.  The new powers are usually champions of the poor to begin with who sooner or later embrace corruption and, once again begin funneling wealth to the wealthy but it doesn't happen over night.  The only way I've come up with to break this cycle would be to somehow separate wealth from temporal power, and power from wealth, say by doing away with capitalism, guaranteeing every human on the planet the basics (food, clothing, shelter, water, electricity) whether they work or not and making any elected leader live as the poorest person in the community he leads.  Fire God:  I don't think YA wants us blogging, but leaders would lead for the experience, possibly for the prestige and only be obliged to remain relatively poor during their term.  A leader who's in it for a chance to increase his or her wealth makes for a bad leader...who does that make me think of?  Hm.

Answer 8

Every year, millions of people get their tax refunds and the chance to eliminate most of their debt.....

and oddly enough, they are RIGHT BACK where they started NEXT tax year.

Clearly, no matter how you re-distribute the wealth, the spenders will spend, the savers will save, and the investors will invest.

It's NO ACCIDENT wealth is "distributed" today the way it is.