20 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by eatmybishopsure if you take the estimated value off everything it could be calculated.
if everyone sold everything in the world how much would it come to? is it even possible to work out such a question....
However to whom should you sell?
And if you choose to just ignore that,... well the value of money would disappear,..
So what is moneyworth, if there is nothing at all (no gold, etc etc) to base the value of your money on. What does it matter that you have $1 or $ 9435676865845949469499 ? It doesn't matter anything at all.
On the other side we would have no problem because we sold all our livestock, and water, etc so we would die very quickly :'(
20 Nov 07
Originally posted by MetBierOpfair point.... i guess it was a stupid question!
sure if you take the estimated value off everything it could be calculated.
However to whom should you sell?
And if you choose to just ignore that,... well the value of money would disappear,..
So what is moneyworth, if there is nothing at all (no gold, etc etc) to base the value of your money on. What does it matter that you have $1 or $ 94356768 ...[text shortened]... no problem because we sold all our livestock, and water, etc so we would die very quickly :'(
let me put it another way.... if you had all the money in the world and wanted to buy everything, would you have enough?
20 Nov 07
I think I read somewhere that if everyone in the UK (and I guess it works for any Western country) were to get theier 'share' the whole population would be multi-millionaires and would not have to work!
Of course that is nonsense - as soon as someone starts selling-up the value of whatever they are selling reduces. And with a country of millionaires who will empty the bins?
The original question doesnt have any meaningful answer.
21 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by eatmybishopIf 'every one' sold everything they owned - who would buy?
if everyone sold everything in the world how much would it come to? is it even possible to work out such a question....
It's a fair question because the new owners would be included in 'every one' in their turn, they would sell everything they owned too.
The only ones that actually can buy everything owned by eartlings are interstellar aliens. Not for money but for other goods in exchange, like a paradisian planet somewhere for us, the human kind, to have a fresh start with.
22 Nov 07
Originally posted by eatmybishopYes.
fair point.... i guess it was a stupid question!
let me put it another way.... if you had all the money in the world and wanted to buy everything, would you have enough?
For starters, money is being made for a long time already. The things on the planet now are just a tiny fraction of what there has been.
Seconds, If you had all the money, everyone else is broke. They would do practically anything to get some of your money :p
28 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59That's because capitalism creates wealth. Without the capitalist system, that wealth would quickly erode as saved up goods are used up. Then people have to go back to work, but why would they work so hard knowing that the best producers and canniest leaders already once had their wealth taken from them?
I think I read somewhere that if everyone in the UK (and I guess it works for any Western country) were to get theier 'share' the whole population would be multi-millionaires and would not have to work!
Of course that is nonsense - as soon as someone starts selling-up the value of whatever they are selling reduces. And with a country of millionaires who will empty the bins?
The original question doesnt have any meaningful answer.
01 Dec 07
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaNot as much though. Not the kind of wealth that would make everyone immediately wealthy if split up evenly. Capitalism produces wealth very well, though it's not the only way to produce wealth. For example, there's always imperialism and coastal raiding a la the northern European countries in the past.
Eh? Wealth existed long before capitalism.