Should global wealth be re-distributed evenly?

[justynasta]

In my opinion global wealth shouldn't be re-distributed evenly, because it would destroy the existing economy. Especially it would destroy people. Money changes man for worse man. The world could go mad. I don't want it.

[NaKuzajewska]

For my global wealth shouldn't be re-distributed evenly, because it would have many bad effects. If bad people had acces to a lot of money, they would use it to make world worse and then people certainly would regre it.

[kowalskidzik]

No. I think that it would destroy economy. And it's risk

[Adifanstal]

No. I think everybody should have that what he was working. It would be a big theft to steal somebody's goods and re-distribute it.

[OlaaMej]

I don't think so, each region has its own wealth and that makes a world so different and interesting. We shouldn't re-distributed global wealth, because this would destroy everything we have so far and we would have to start it all over again.

[annmadej]

i don't agree with this, i think that this would be very unfair for all people who work very hard for their wealth.

[klamolga]

This is a hard question often asked by scientists. According to the idea of equality, everyone should get the same kind of wealth. But does everyone deserve the same fate? Or maybe this idea is impossible to meet? After all equality is just a concept with no attachments to the reality.‏

[Lucywa]

In my opinion global wealth shouldn't be re-distributed evenly. Sometimes people are poor because they don't want to go to work. Some people worked for many years to have money for a decent life.In the world not everyone can be rich.

[kruwik]

I think that global wealth souldn't be re-distributed evenly because somebody doesn't know how to use money or what they can do with them. And in result, they will spend them on wrong way or for bad things, for instance on drinking alcohol..

[wiktoriasz]

Definitely it is difficult question but I think that global wealth shouldn't be re-distributed evenly because not everyone merit to have a money. There is a part of people who spent a money on alcohol and drugs and why they should use a global wealth? There are also people who don't work and I think that it would be ~ unfair if they have money just like people who hard work.

[Krisi]

What's the purpose? I think somewhere near the end this will also lead to tyranny.

[ritzkevin]

Sharing is loving so we better distribute it equally.

[tomdaiski]

I do not think it is necessary. Wealth is already distributed through the market in a semi-efficient manner. This is what we called microeconomic. Think it the other way, suppose we distribute all the wealth evenly, under this situation, no one has motivation to produce products or doing works since they are getting paid equally no matter what.

[Altria]

Global wealth shouldn’t be re-distributed. Property is a sacred and inviolable right. If we rudely re-distribute the global wealth, some people will think that they can get money even if they do nothing, which is harmful to the world. Wealth is created by hard work. A better way is to advocated the wealthy persons to help the poor, teaching them skills of living, earning money, rather than directly give money to them.

[Karinagtzga]

Should global wealth be re-distributed evenly?

What do YOU think?

Let's think about consequences. First of all, it is a crisis in every segments of economy. If everyone will be rich, then nobody will work. We will have a lot of money, but there will be nothing to buy because no one goes to a factory, office, etc. and does daily job.

Agree with your point of view. However why always do we think of rich people? What about if we get a balance as a medium class. Everybody can keep their job but living in a decent way.

[MartaC]

Yes, global wealth should be re-distributed evenly.
There is no meritocratic reason why a person should born rich and another one struggling for surviving. It is just a matter of luck. Of course, those who have been lucky enough to be born in a wealth environment fears the opportunity to share this opportunity, because they very well know that for any privileged person, there are thousands who are underprivileged.
However, there are many reasons why it is not only just (which will be enough) but also advantageous to re-distribute the global wealth evenly.
Wealth goes together with political power. In order to have a more just and democratic system, re-distribution is required. On the contrary, polarization of wealth means that a few people decide the fate of the majority, increasing corruption. To re-distribute wealth it means to give opportunity to many countries to take ownership of their lives and to end the mosto common underling colonial thought: that some countries have to take care of other countries, they have to help them emancipating, they have to teach them how to be successful.
Redistributive policies also allow people to have easier access to education, which might decrease the percentage of crimes in the suburbs.

[CrystalP]

Let's try this. I understand it is unfair to take money away from people just because they are wealthy. However, if we look back to see how the wealth was accumulated in a family hundreds or even thousands of years ago, we might notice that it was also unfair. For example, back in the ages before the government formed or well functioned, people became very rich because they had access to natural treasures such as gold, diamond, petroleum, etc. The uneven distribution of wealth back then can significantly affect economic inequality nowadays.