I Love U2
Why We All Can't Be Rich... Because "richness" is relevant. If the average world income is 10,000 annual per person, then an income of 30,000 annual is considered rich. If the average income per person is 1,000,000 annual, then an income of 5,000,000 annual is considered rich. Richness is relevant to the average world income, to give arbitrary numbers. Usually, this is around three or more times the average income for a given scale.
So technically, if everyone in the world had as much money as the richest man alive today, the value of one unit of currency would decrease, and also, the term "rich" won't apply anymore, as "rich" is a relative term, as all adjectives are. Adjectives are comparative to currents, not definitive as most nouns are. A bed is a bed, whether the word's definition changes or not. It's a place to sleep. It can have many different terms placed onto it, but it's still what it defines. As of adjectives, the definition stays the same, but the point where you use its opposite versus its self, that point varies relative to the average quality of what we apply that adjective, too.
For instance, a thousand years ago, being fat was thought to be pretty. At that point of time, it meant you could afford to eat a lot of food, and thus was a high status marker.
Nowadays, in first world countries, being fat is typically considered as being ugly, as most people in first world countries could afford to eat. On a worldwide scale, being fat usually means being ugly. However, if you take a smaller scale, and select a particular area, lets say, Ethiopia, things are different. If you are fat in Ethiopia, it could be a high status marker the same way it was a millennium ago. It could also mean that you have tapeworm, though. But you get what I'm saying.
Adjectives are relative, and if everyone was rich by today's standards, then everyone would be average, making the word "rich" irrelevant, as there's no deviation in the amount of money one has versus the rest of the people on a scale. Also, the buying power of one unit of currency would decrease, meaning that people would have the exact same buying power as before, thus meaning, no difference.
Also, the cycle of imbalance is what keeps the economy moving. Think of it this way. In science, an imbalance of energy causes an energy flow or transfer. Once all the energy is in equilibrium, everything is at a standstill, and there's no transfer of energy. Think of the amount of energy as money, and the flow as the economic flux and trade. There would be no economy, and we'd all rot!
So there's a method to the madness, and why imbalance exists is for a reason. That's why we all can't be rich. I guess I should make this into a story, too, to explain.
So technically, if everyone in the world had as much money as the richest man alive today, the value of one unit of currency would decrease, and also, the term "rich" won't apply anymore, as "rich" is a relative term, as all adjectives are. Adjectives are comparative to currents, not definitive as most nouns are. A bed is a bed, whether the word's definition changes or not. It's a place to sleep. It can have many different terms placed onto it, but it's still what it defines. As of adjectives, the definition stays the same, but the point where you use its opposite versus its self, that point varies relative to the average quality of what we apply that adjective, too.
For instance, a thousand years ago, being fat was thought to be pretty. At that point of time, it meant you could afford to eat a lot of food, and thus was a high status marker.
Nowadays, in first world countries, being fat is typically considered as being ugly, as most people in first world countries could afford to eat. On a worldwide scale, being fat usually means being ugly. However, if you take a smaller scale, and select a particular area, lets say, Ethiopia, things are different. If you are fat in Ethiopia, it could be a high status marker the same way it was a millennium ago. It could also mean that you have tapeworm, though. But you get what I'm saying.
Adjectives are relative, and if everyone was rich by today's standards, then everyone would be average, making the word "rich" irrelevant, as there's no deviation in the amount of money one has versus the rest of the people on a scale. Also, the buying power of one unit of currency would decrease, meaning that people would have the exact same buying power as before, thus meaning, no difference.
Also, the cycle of imbalance is what keeps the economy moving. Think of it this way. In science, an imbalance of energy causes an energy flow or transfer. Once all the energy is in equilibrium, everything is at a standstill, and there's no transfer of energy. Think of the amount of energy as money, and the flow as the economic flux and trade. There would be no economy, and we'd all rot!
So there's a method to the madness, and why imbalance exists is for a reason. That's why we all can't be rich. I guess I should make this into a story, too, to explain.
