Topic: Which problem will you choose to solve? - page 3. (Read 1373 times)

That's true and without the poor the rich can't get a successful business so in as much as the rich just sit and get more money it only shows that the poor at least have something to hold on to with their pay they can't depend on street begging, at the moment there problem have been solved.
The rich only need the poor as in manpower to make more money, without the manpower that business will crumble even if it's Elon musk.

In short, manpower, poor people do the dirty work, but the rich work with their brains and their money, which is why they earn more. No matter what it is connected to, poor people can't also buy their needs if they haven't been employed by those rich people, and rich people can't earn a single profit without the manpower that is coming from poor people.
Let's say you purchased a share from the company of Elon, which only the rich can afford. If the company is successful, the rich also gain more profit, and guess what? Those employees received an increase. No, the managerial people or supervisors received the raise, not those below who keep their hands dirty and just take orders from above.

Even though many poor people have different problems, there are some who have financial difficulties that you can help with jobs or other work that can be able to provide food to there table, because if you can't help them with jobs or other work that can be able to provide them with food to their table, then you won't be able to satisfy their needs.If that is difficult, there is no way we can be able to solve a poor situation. In fact, some people can see you as an enemy for not providing the solution to them.

According to my point of view, the only way to satisfy many poor individuals is to provide for their basic needs, such as providing for a community's lack of water, if someone with money is able to do so.

Looking at this i believe you can solve the problem of the rich and as well the poor.
It just start with giving ear to both parties and knowing what the problem is.

Necessarily the rich might be rich and still be having issues that is giving them nightmares and you know that by knowing what their inner issues is and giving them audience will also pave a way to solving the problem of the poor..

Let me share you this short story:.There was a day A rich man and a poor man found themselves in church asking God for help and in solving their problem.
The poor man was so loud and violent in his prayer while the rich man was just Soft spoken and communicating with God like a business partner..
With the poor man loud violent prayers the rich man was distracted and looked at the poor man praying with so much anger in his request for money.
So then,to the rich man,the poor man is a disturbing is business tete a tete with God,so he sat back,put his hand in his pocket and brought out money the poor man is asking God for and gave to him right there..
The poor man was so happy and at that moment was thanking God for the blessings. So the rich man by reaching out to the needy poor man his business alignment with God was approved,and both was at balance and Thanking God.

Whats the lesson here now,From what the rich have,you can solve the problem of the poor and also the rich,so your duty is to be a problem solver to both parties and its done by asking and knowing what each of them want like in the story now God was the third party asking to know what they wants,the poor said said what he want and so is the rich man,and then God use the rich man to give the poor man what he desires and blessed the rich man for what he did..for me like ill solve the both problems.
Lets look at it that way all men are all equal.

Solving problems between poor people and rich people is actually a problem that can be solved all at once, or simultaneously. A simple example, a rich person who creates a large company or factory and the factory really has good potential. That way, the company or factory will definitely need employees to be able to run the factory. So that way, rich people and poor people can solve their problems. In plant science, this is called mutualistic symbiosis, which means mutual benefit to each other.

So solving the problems of rich people can indeed solve the problems of poor people. Because life always goes hand in hand, just as there are rich people, there are certainly poor people around them.
So solving the problems of poor people and rich people, in my opinion, can be done simultaneously.

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

Definitely, I will pick up both the poor and the rich to assist in problem solving. From the perspective of human dignity, helping or solving problems is an obligation for every human. But if this problem solving or help means economic stability, then, according to my opinion, the poor have more rights than the rich to get in. Because rich guys could handle all the problems by themselves, they don't have too many problems. I think problems are only caused by health and family. Poor people have to face one crucial thing: money, which they don't have. I believe that money could possibly solve their problems. which problems are food, cloth, and house. But if we look at it from another perspective, which is government authority, there is no doubt about it. Everyone knows that all the problems are legitimate with one guy, which is the rich guy, because helping the rich guy is helping all the poor people.

Yes, that's right, friend. In solving problems, we are also required to look at the future impacts. Is that a good impact or otherwise? We really have to make sure that solving these problems can also benefit us too. In essence, we must try to create balance in the problem solving process. Don't let other people's problems be solved but have a bad impact on ourselves. This should be avoided. We must solve every problem by bringing benefits to all parties. Well, this is not easy and basically there are no easy problems to solve. Everything requires hard work. Rich people sometimes create solutions for their own businesses but this also has an impact on solving the problems of poor people. Like rich people who open new factory branches and absorb more workers from people who need work. Yes, there are steps to create a solution that solves the problem of both parties at once.

Problems exist in the lives of both the rich and the poor.  Just as the rich have many problems, the poor also have many problems. But there are people from many sectors to solve the problems of the rich.  And the biggest thing is that the rich have money to solve their problems.  And to solve the problems of the poor, there is no money, no people. Even they do not understand how to solve their problems.  The poor have economic problems, problems of meeting basic needs, problems of food, education, medical problems.  According to my opinion we all should come forward to solve the problems of the poor.

According to natural law, when you get benefits, there must be something to lose in every atmosphere of life or in living ecosystems, even though we can see aspects of mutual benefit or in biology we call it symbiosis mutualism, and in fact, when viewed from the other side, there are things that are detrimental to one one party as well as between one human being and another human being.
We know that every business development for people who are rich or have capital aims to make a profit, and he needs other people's energy to achieve this because basically he cannot do it himself, and this creates several related interests between the rich and the poor for mutual benefit. In terms of salary, in my opinion, it is usually prepared according to regional standards which are adjusted to the job, if the poor do not get payment according to existing regulations then that is where the company does not respect its employees.

But you can't do that directly. You give money to them to improve the lives of the poor, right? it may be valid for a few days after they receive the money.LOL
This requires a management system on how to help them in the long term, provide them with skills and make their jobs much more effective, and keep in mind that it needs to have a lot of people to be well coordinated and conceptualized.

Unless you really just want to be remembered for giving them money.

The Rich doesn't need more help like the poor who is looking for way to get his or her daily bread to feed, I think I will prefer to solve the problem of the poor than the rich because it hard for you to help the poor to rise financially and he or she will forget about the help in the future. The Rich has all his want and even though he doesn't have all he wants, I think he can use money to get all he wants to live a good life because he has the resources to solve his problem at anytime.when you solve the problem of the poor in an environment, it make you popular in that particular environment because the poor people you solve their problems will keep spreading the information in a way it will be giving you joy.

This much is right, solving a problem for someone can indirectly affect another. However, it should be remembered that not all benefits and effects are equally distributed, much like your example. The reason for this is that you are not actively solving the problem of the other party it just so happens that both parties are correlated in some aspect that one is indirectly being touched on as you exclusively work on the others. Another example of this is solving the problem of the poor, specifically in terms of household problems, this may lead to a greater motivation and drive for them to work that pushes a good work performance, indirectly affected by this is the rich or the company the poor is working to have more customers, have better products, or good business data outcome. It may not cause such big change and effect for the rich but it still did something, it's just that the bigger benefit is centered on the poor whose problem was the one mainly being solved and the company was just related or connected to the effect for the poor.

Now in a situation like this is a situation that we must look at from various perspectives that will ultimately provide a solution that will embrace all parties to be involved in it and mutually benefit each other. We can't keep thinking about who we have to solve the problem, but we have to think about how one action we take will solve the problem or at least we will have an effect or help all parties a little.
And in this case I agree that maybe there will be people who benefit more, but overall it helps a lot, and I think it would also be difficult to make everyone benefit equally or even impossible.

How would you be able to fix other problems if even yourself is already broke? You have a point, and again, most of those businessmen have done it before, like they've already tried it on themselves or on their relatives, like helping other people.
 
We should also make sure that solving other problems can also solve them for you, meaning if you are releasing some products or services to them, they should work on you or on your relatives so that you can be sure that they are working.

From your explanation I learned a lesson that solving a problem in one corner will also result in problems in other corners being resolved. Well this makes a lot of sense and I think that's how it's going to go. Both parties can benefit from each other on the one hand but on the one hand if one party is harmed then the other party can also be harmed. Although there are certain aspects that will benefit one party more. For example, if rich people open up a lot of jobs. But they give low wages to their workers. well in this angle only the rich benefit. Poor people will be a little disadvantaged because their work is not properly appreciated. But in general there are still benefits for both parties. Because the poor are also still helped even though the salary is not high which is not in accordance with their hard work.

It's true and I can't deny that everyone has different needs and over time these needs will continue to increase. However, this returns to each individual in responding to this matter, where when the needs begin to increase, this also needs to be balanced with increased efforts as well. and I think that at this time we cannot only rely on income from one side so that our needs can be met. However, working overtime is also not the right choice because it can threaten our health. And with existing technological advancements, I think trading is the right choice to be able to increase our income, so that we can meet our needs and have savings to answer urgent needs in the future. However, this must also be accompanied by adequate skills and knowledge.

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

For sure it's better to solve the problem of the poor, I mean what's going to be the problem of the rich is just how they are going to multiply their investments probably, meaning they already have their investments or money and they just need to multiply that or have multiple sources of income in order to become an even richer right? I mean just compare that to a poor problem, it is how they are going to start from scratch how they are going to start earning and have multiple incomes in order to become rich or at least financially stable.

Both of them probably is going to be difficult for the most part and it doesnt really matter because it is all a challenge for us, and what ever what the challenges in our life are there is always a way to solve them. I heard from a podcast about financial savings where they said that it doesnt matter how many times you fail, what matter is how many times you pick yourself up because we are all a product of failing, and being successful is not easy, so it's normal to fail we just need to keep on trying until we finally made it.

Many people might want to choose to solve the problem of the rich, as their are possibilities of them very getting favor from the rich at the end of the day.

But me I will choose to solve the problem of many poor people, as that appears to be the right thing do, one thing that motive someone sometimes to do what ever they want to do is how many people can benefit from that thing that they are doing be it business or any form of organization, I know profit and gain will also be included, but what will be the use of spending all that you have added to those that already have it but are not just satisfied rather they need more.

Every little help that you give to the poor are much more appreciated and can easily be noticed and can also easily add value to the society than what we give to the rich. In solving societal problems one should always focus on those who are not going to be able to provide and cater for their needs them self, so that is what am going to do, I will rather add value to someone life than earn/gain favor from people.

What you must know about the rich or poor is that no can entirely depends on himself or herself for any assistance or to have all things done with their money, naturally we need both each others to excel in our nation but most of the rich people turns it against the poor maybe having this act of humour that the poor aren't supposed to be in their class, yes that is true for sure but whatever they are today or being producing without the poor or the average people I don't think that could work effectively. So sometimes the rich should always try to be hospitable and charitable, irrespective of their position or firm today.