There is still a problem with "the more you work the more you get", because we don't take into consideration how hard the work is.. One might be writing screenplays for 5 hours and another one - constructing details for vehicles. Should they get the same amount of money?
No of course not. The poll is kind of a silly one. The capitalist system, with free markets, is a good one I think. Maybe something better will come along eventually but it rewards hard work and creativity in business abd relies less on government than socialism. 
Topic: Money and people - page 7. (Read 4779 times)
There is still a problem with "the more you work the more you get", because we don't take into consideration how hard the work is.. One might be writing screenplays for 5 hours and another one - constructing details for vehicles. Should they get the same amount of money?
You can't just simple divide money in the world.
You can give away just money you have, your own money.
If you think about government and public money, you have to be aware that most countries in the world are in debts, and, in fact, asking for financial help and money from financial institutions and banks.
In some countries, like Switzerland, appeared idea about Guaranteed personal income.
It will be basic income for all people in the country, and will replace all social benefits and assistance from the state.
Swiss people rejected this idea on the referendum, but this possibility is much more realistic, and possible for rich countries like Switzerland, than your idea without explanation how to divide money in the real life.
You can give away just money you have, your own money.
If you think about government and public money, you have to be aware that most countries in the world are in debts, and, in fact, asking for financial help and money from financial institutions and banks.
In some countries, like Switzerland, appeared idea about Guaranteed personal income.
It will be basic income for all people in the country, and will replace all social benefits and assistance from the state.
Swiss people rejected this idea on the referendum, but this possibility is much more realistic, and possible for rich countries like Switzerland, than your idea without explanation how to divide money in the real life.
Let's imagine the world, where government has all the money at the beginning and we need to decide how this money can be shared with people. Do we all need to be equal? Or should our salary depend on the work we do?
i'm a worker,i get form what i do,i agree with "the more you work the more you get" . i think everybody must be struggle for what they need and they want,this world will full of hard work. 
There is no realistic method to distribute money on people equally. Who or what will trust to do so ? A government? Which in most cases are full of corruption? So I believe in the more you work the more you get. And work smart not hard 
I voted for "the more you work the more you get" option, but I was wrong. Working not necessary means production or services for others benefit. Unfortunately positive contributions are not easy to measure. An artist can have more positive effect on people in two minutes than an accountant in 8 hours, however in most cases the accountant makes the more important work.
That touches on the reason why I didn't vote at all. We live in a largely business-oriented society, so we know at some level that hard work does not necessarily translate into value added. Of course, we also know at some level that "value added" is in the mind of the valuers, which gives an open door to scammers and other folks that are good with mind games.
Unfortunately, social systems are something like that mythical manure pile. If you're not living near one, it smells musky and exotic - but if you're actually living in a particular one...
I need not go on...
Let's imagine the world, where government has all the money at the beginning and we need to decide how this money can be shared with people. Do we all need to be equal? Or should our salary depend on the work we do?
You don't have to imagine: something like that was tried in the real world after the U.S.S.R. imploded. When it came time to desocialize, the new Russian government decided that the best way was to issue shares in State-owned enterprises to everyone. It was like a gigantic "Free and Fair Distribution" experiment - and it had the same results.
Most of the folks who got their shares said, "Yay! Free money!" and sold their shares for whatever they could get. The biggest buyers with the most liquid bids - those folks were the first oligarchs.
"Pareto's Law" lives. What was interesting about the '14 Free-And-Fair fad is that it showed why Pareto's Principle worked. The ones who "scooped up all the money" were a mixture of bad and good, but what they had in common was that they were more future-oriented.
Funny that a big swinging whale would have so much in common with a bagholder, but there you go.
I believe that people who work as hard as they do should receive a higher money unlike people who are not taking serious work or lesser work should be paid less in money, even they are instances that rates may follow due to education gained by the person. Knowledge and skills by the person is also a plus factor for the person to paid higher in money..
I voted for "the more you work the more you get" option, but I was wrong. Working not necessary means production or services for others benefit. Unfortunately positive contributions are not easy to measure. An artist can have more positive effect on people in two minutes than an accountant in 8 hours, however in most cases the accountant makes the more important work.
There will be no equality when greed takes over people's mind. They often take advantage of other's weaknesses. In the end, those who work hard will not prosper while those greedy people will earn more money.
To be equal in anything is unfortunetely just a dream. Especialy when we are talking about money. There will be always people who will have more then they need and those who doesn't have for a decent living. And nobody can change that.
In order for people to be equal then all people should be able to do the same as well.
It seem not right to see an uneducated person having a salary that is equal to a very educated person ho has a lot to bring for the society. Think of it.
It seem not right to see an uneducated person having a salary that is equal to a very educated person ho has a lot to bring for the society. Think of it.
Let's imagine the world, where government has all the money at the beginning and we need to decide how this money can be shared with people. Do we all need to be equal? Or should our salary depend on the work we do?
Jump to: