Give the Poor something to give back to the rich (representative wealth)
Started 21 Jan 2012 – by Godservant
Being Poor in no way means you have nothing to contribute.
Being able to contribute often means thinking about ways to be Rich.
Being able to think about ways to be Rich, encourages growth.
Encouraging growth diminishes poverty.
If the Poor are given a way to give back to the Rich - a representative wealth (to act as substitute for what they cannot contribute, being Poor) - they will understand themselves as participants in global growth and will be seen as responsible givers: the begining of the path to wealth.
Things you can give the Rich: performances, declarations, feasts, representative recognition (statues, sculptures, etc.), competition, appreciation, honourary roles (ceremonies), choices, etc.
In a perfected world, the Poor give as much representatively as the Rich give in practice and works.
SaintMe – 25/01/2012 1:45:47 PM
to put this in term of monetary contribution is a narrow view. In many countries the poor are not lazy... they do nothing but contribute to society. They keep it ticking along, doing menial work that is hard and not well paid... Why should they have to give any more than that! The rich in society should be responsible for improving society by improving infrastructure anjd education... that is if they want to give anything at all to anyone!
-
Godservant – 25/01/2012 5:35:33 PM
I am not sure why it is not appearing but the post below you say "putting the Rich on one side and the Poor on the other makes impossible NOT to be lazy about what people give."
-
Godservant – 25/01/2012 5:44:22 PM
Also, I think you are missing the key point that the Poor would not be required to provide the resources for what they were being asked to give to the Rich... if you can, give it a moment and it will make sense
Godservant – 25/01/2012 5:27:54 PM
It is the same as Democracy and is important because of the precedent it sets. People are always saying the Rich should pay, because that is easy - I do not even have to defend the Rich, what I am trying to communicate is that putting the Rich on one side and the Poor on the other makes it impossible for people to be lazy about what they give. If the Rich could not deny they had received something (in return) they would be more generous.
-
Godservant – 25/01/2012 5:29:27 PM
Godservant wrote: putting the Rich on one side and the Poor on the other makes it impossible for people to be lazy about what they give.
that should read "not" as in
Godservant wrote: putting the Rich on one side and the Poor on the other makes it impossible for people NOT to be lazy about what they give.