20 Mar '15 23:27>
Originally posted by Wajomabeing poor.At first I thought, sounds right, feels wrong. I have thought about it and now I feel sure. Money supply, both easing and tightening, are tools used to effect the creation of wealth. In the examples of wealth that you have given none of them can exist without a workers input at some level. ( though some corporations are trying tirelessly to remove humanity from that equation). A village chief says he owns 100 cows 25 goats 40 chickens and 6 wife's and is deemed wealthy.( it is all relative). We (western societys, usually) do not tend to trade objects, rather we trade their value.( recognized in $ terms). i.e perception is $ = wealth. I agree there is not 1 pie, but it is the number of pies that you own ,(rather than you create,as a worker does), that determines the perception of wealth.
Wealth and money...different. Money is just a tool, a measurement of wealth, it is not wealth.[/b]
So in either case one person being wealthy does not equal another person being poor.
one case I can think of, please correct me if I am wrong here, is the profit that Wal-mart made. I forget the actual numbers but I believe that the profit made / the number of employees was about $25,000
each. That is wealth diversion. Corporations create an atmosphere of wealth that disguises the poverty that they create.
It is not necessarily the case that 1 person being wealthy equals one being poor, rather it is a sliding proportionate ( or disproportionate as the case may be) ratio of 1 rich equals a pyramid of levels down to x number of poor. This does not of course "always" apply. Just in the case of corporations operated by people totally detached from all outcomes but their own.