If money was not a measure of "wealth" ?

Question

how would a rich person, like say for instance Donald Trump, define himself?

Answer 1

i guess you mean that wealth is what you have earned. mankind has chosen money as a means of exchange to reap the fruit of our hard work.

if  money was not the measure of wealth what would you like the measure of wealth to be? I do not think it will make a difference as that commodity will become valuable and highly sought after.

money (wealth) secures our survival, makes it possible for us to live longer. and this systems work well for the majority of people. you make money, get married, buy a house, car, have children and put them through college and save some for your old age. perfect so far!

but money (wealth) also gives us undisputed power which some people use inappropriately. this abuse of power is give money a  bad name because some people like to take a short cut to wealth and abundant means of survival. It is this part that needs to be stopped.

May be we should limit how much wealth a person can own so that we can limit one persons power,,,

Enjoy

Answer 2

land.

Answer 3

I'll turn the question. All the millions of Donald Trump means nothing to a Bantu Tribesman, but don't you even dare think of touching their cattle. They are their "wealth". The medium of exchange determines wealth.

Answer 4

...the number of wives...incoming and outgoing...

...by his health and demeanor...

Answer 5

  Without answering to your detail as a comparative thing, your Q can be answered by asking YOU, how do you define wealth?

  I feel good fortune to wake each day and say thank you to whomever, with my first breath.

   Obviously we are a money driven, or assisted species, but even the poor can feel levels of worth and wealth.

   Do you have food to eat? Water to drink? Air to breathe (which is free by the way)? Does that not equal some measure of wealth?

A.F.

Answer 6

I think there are a lot of wealthy people who actually decide they "are" the wealth, even though this is something totally on the outside of themselves.  In these cases, I think rich people are hiding behind that money because they really do not have anything worth extreme value on the inside of themselves.  They have always placed value on anything outside of themselves, and anything materialistic.  

That is why I have chosen to say... "I am a self made millionaire. I am rich and abundant in all areas of my life."  I did not say I make a million dollars.  And I only mean it in the context that money has no value in my life my value lies in quality of character, and how much time, energy and effort I spend on getting to know the genuine person I am on the inside.

Thanks for reading!

Answer 7

By his HAIR

Seriously, if not by wealth then by power.  But we could argue that the two go hand in hand, so I'm going to say by the quaility of the relationships he has cultivated and by the reputation those relationships have garnered him; is he considered trustworthy? honest? reliable? dependable? The list of qualities could be endless, but I think you get my point.

***(6 mins later)  It's a sad measure of our society that almost every other answer so far deals with material possessions as a measure of wealth.  I really think the asker was looking for something less tangible----but I could be totally off base and do not want to be offensive, this is a very interesting look into the psycology of our society ;)

Answer 8

Without money, a person who defines themself by money would not be lost, but would simply have a different standard of measurment. With the examle of Donald Trump, I have no idea what  else he has going for him besides money, but he might measure himself by his libido, or body hair, or perhaps his intellegence or ability to provide for others.

I believe that if money was not a measure of wealth, wealth would be determined by a person's ability to provide for others. To my mind, in a rural tribe of nomads (I apologize if this is a silly example), a person of wealth would be one who could provide nourishment to his/her peers, family, and community. Who would have the intelligence to understand the best ways of life for his community, and whose personality included humor and charisma. Wealth without monetary means is, to me, the qualities we desire and look for in our world leaders, friends, and providers.

Answer 9

Only Donald would know how he would define himself. For us to say so is judgemental.  

"Wealth" has always been affiliated w/ how much money, "riches" a person has.  No one's ever said a person was wealthy because they were nice or has a good heart.

Wealth = Money. Which also equates to Money = Power.

Those who don't care much about the "riches" are those who are humble, hard-working individuals who cares nothing about being noticed by other people other than his loved ones.  The rewards for this far surpasses what most wealthy people gains: Being truly loved and cared for by those closest to them; spouse, parents, children, grandkids, and best friends.

Because what it boils down to is how much quality time is spent w/ those who really matters.  

Rich folks are usually so busy attending meetings, social affiliates, and making more money, they don't get to spend much quality time w/ their family.

Wealth is good but just having enough money is the way to go..That's my opinion.

Answer 10

He would still be "rich". He would simply measure it by the amount of stuff he could buy/already has.

If your question is, "If money was no longer existent/valid" then you can scratch out the "stuff he could buy" and may even the first sentence.

I personally dislike having objects to represent value, esp. when you include credit cards which allow for debt. I much rather prefer the old ways when you would simply trade one thing for another.

Answer 11

Same way that wealth was defined in earlier times : by the amount of animals, food, farm land, property, and resources (iron, timber, copper, etc.) one had.