now you can be right wherever you are.

Billionaires: What would happen if the world's richest men donated $1 million to every inhabitant on earth?
says Luke on May 23rd 16 (#792450)


Everyone would starve to death. Nobody would plant and harvest potatoes. Why? Because they are millionaires, why should they? You can't eat money.
says SolitaryMan on May 23rd 16 (#2308341)
Reply | +1 | 1

I remember reading something on those lines....if the government gave everyone over 60, one millions pounds with the stipulation that each one must buy a house,car,furniture,white goods and have a holiday.....the building trade would be busy, car companies would sell millions of new cars and all of industry would be unendated with business, ain't life grand...
says JD on May 23rd 16 (#2308350)
Reply | +1 | 1

But where would the government get the money for that program? The taxpayers might not like it. (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627765)
Reply | 0 | 0

They have billions available, they would soon get most back...
says JD on Aug 12th 17 (#2627778)
Reply | +1 | 1

If they only have billions available, that means they could only give a million each to thousands of people aged 60+. Surely there are more seniors than that..? (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627799)
Reply | 0 | 0

I said billionS not a billion, keep up tink
says JD on Aug 12th 17 (#2627857)
Reply | +1 | 1

And I said thousandS, not a thousand. (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627859)
Reply | 0 | 0

says JD on Aug 12th 17 (#2627869)
Reply | +1 | 1 (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627871)
Reply | 0 | 0

The thousands you mentioned, were people not money you Wally (maniac)
says JD on Aug 13th 17 (#2627923)
Reply | +1 | 1

Yes, of course, thousands of people. You suggested giving 1 million pounds to each person over 60. (thousands of people) x (1 million pounds each) = billions of pounds = what you said the government has available Unfortunately, there are 15.3 million people over 60 years old in the UK. (15.3 million people) x (1 million pounds each) = 15.3 trillion pounds, which is about 20 times the ENTIRE annual UK government spending. Conclusion: the million pound scheme is utter nonsense. Elementary, my dear Watson. (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 13th 17 (#2628005)
Reply | 0 | 0

This was hypothetical must live in fairyland....hehe
says JD on Aug 13th 17 (#2628110)
Reply | +1 | 1

Fairies can do math much better than you can. (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 13th 17 (#2628176)
Reply | +1 | 1

The value of money would go WAY down. Maybe they could just help the deserving of the needy out.
says JerryHendrickson on May 23rd 16 (#2308377)
Reply | 0 | 0

Everyone would stop watching 'Who wants to be a Millionaire'
says Quatzolect on May 24th 16 (#2308578)
Reply | 0 | 0

We'd have far fewer billionaires. And the ones recieving the 1 million dollars would soon be poor again or dead from drug over dose's
says Brianl on Aug 9th 16 (#2360892)
Reply | +1 | 1

Do you have verifiable stats to show such an idea is even possible in a world with approx. between 7.5 and 8 BILLION inhabitants? Everyone with a net worth of at least 2 million dollars and above would have to have to have enough liquid assets to donate ALL of their worth except the one million they must be left with in order to remain equal with the population to which they would be giving up their money.
says Howler on Aug 12th 17 (#2627668)
Reply | +1 | 1

Of course it's not possible.
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627766)
Reply | +1 | 1

They couldn't. Since the total net worth of all the world's billionaires combined amounts to about $7.67 trillion, they would be able to give $1 million to each of about 7.67 million people, or about enough to make every person in Hong Kong a millionaire. Or, if they divided the billionaires' wealth equally among the entire world's 7.5 billion people, that would be a little over $1,000 for each.
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627761)
Reply | +1 | 1

Seems to me this should be a good example to show why the Progressive push to vilify the "rich" (as long as they are not Progressives who are rich) as evil and in need of government mandate to "pay up" could not really be a solution to their ongoing pro-class warfare agenda.
says Howler on Aug 12th 17 (#2627787)
Reply | +1 | 1

Right you are. George Soros, Warren Buffett or Mark Zuckerberg, for example, would be exempt. (biggrin)
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627820)
Reply | +1 | 1

In the USA alone, if EVERY penny of every single asset of even the top 5%, not just the 1%ers, was confiscated to pay down the US debt, it would barely put a dent in it. The hoodwinking that Progressives want to tax only "rich" people in order to "fairly" redistribute wealth across the board is and always has been an intentional misleading of the masses IMO. If they ever thoroughly get their way, it will easily be demonstrated that Party-aligned, Progressive elitists will become wealthier, as the term "rich" for the taxable common folk will include those at much lower income levels in an ongoing "progressive" process.
says Howler on Aug 12th 17 (#2627866)
Reply | +1 | 1

Of course the Progressive 'tax the rich' agenda is a total lie, as anyone who does the arithmetic can easily see. The burden of the Progressive program would fall on the shrinking middle class, as it always has. But of course, shrinking the middle class is also part of the agenda, to the point where there is a rich liberal elite presiding over a permanent voting majority of people dependent on Government handouts, with just enough middle-class taxpayers left over to pay the bills.
says Thinkerbell on Aug 12th 17 (#2627879)
Reply | +1 | 1

Well stated. Sad that so many folks perceive the Progressive hoodwinking as some truth that is meant to be in their best interest as they support those who are helping them to dig their own financial grave.
says Howler on Aug 12th 17 (#2627921)
Reply | +1 | 1

Add A Comment
If you would like to leave a comment, please login or create an account.