“Take money from the rich!“
“Don’t exploit us, common people, any further!“
These voices were often heard when the consumption tax was raised.
This is a bit radical to say, but I think it comes from the idea of redistribution of wealth.
Redistribution of wealth means sharing the money that the rich people have with poor people.
For example, if two people go fishing together, and one of them catches three fish, but the other person doesn’t catch any, the person who caught three fish later shares one with the person who didn’t catch any.
He’s so nice!
Well, the fishing example is just a metaphor, but in reality, rich people have to forcefully redistribute their wealth even if they don’t want to give it away.
Yes, currently, rich people are forced to take their money in order to redistribute wealth.
From a rich person’s point of view, the following arguments can be made.
“I worked hard to earn this money, so let me spend it how I want!”
“I don’t have any money to give to people who aren’t trying!”
“I don’t want to work if they’re going to take so much of my money anyway.”
I certainly understand what they are saying, but I still believe that redistribution of wealth is necessary for society.
I don’t believe that some people should become exceptionally wealthy, but rather that everyone should become wealthy to some extent.
So I will explain in detail below why we need to redistribute wealth.
This world is, ultimately, like gambling
To begin with, the fundamental question is: Why did successful people become successful?
Were they patient? Were they smart? Did they have good connections?
On the other hand, why couldn’t those living on welfare earn money on their own?
Is it because they are less capable? Is it because they were born and raised in poor families?
What is the difference between those who have money and those who don’t?
I think it’s because of luck.
For example, in the example of a person who was able to succeed because he was smart, we can say that the person became rich because he was fortunate enough to be born with the talent of being smart.
This is because he was fortunate enough to be born with the character of perseverance.
This is because she was fortunate enough to be born with the qualities that allow her to be sociable and build good relationships.
They were successful because they had the talent to keep working towards their goals while improving their shortcomings
On the other hand, the reason why poor people are poor can be attributed to their bad luck of being born with low ability or being born into a poor family.
In other words, in a very vain way, ultimately speaking, those who are currently rich were just lucky.
And the poor people were just unlucky.
I know this kind of fatalistic thinking is very vain, but it is an undeniable fact that the qualities we are born with have a tremendous impact on our lives.
Hmmm, I don’t like that way of thinking because it sounds as if the person’s fate has already been decided…
I don’t usually think like that either, I believe that our destiny is in our own hands.
And it’s also a fact that successful people have experienced hardships.
It is also true that there are many people who are born with physical or mental handicaps, while others are born into rich families, and the direction of their lives is determined by things beyond their control.
I believe that such unfairness should be removed as much as possible.
As this world is largely controlled by luck, which we cannot control, I believe that those who are lucky enough to be born with great qualities and become rich need to support those who are unlucky enough to be in a poor situation.
What if the luck you had was bad and your life was the complete opposite of what it is now?
I think it is very painful and sad to suffer from poverty for the rest of your life because of something you cannot control.
So as long as we had that kind of risk, the rich people need to support the poor people.
I don’t think the following attitude is fair at all. “Everything I get is mine!
I believe that successful people should not be conceited.
They couldn’t have done anything in this world without luck.
Happiness does not change when annual income exceeds ,000
According to a study by an economist who won the Nobel Prize in Economics, “happiness peaks at an annual income of $80000.”
What I mean is that no matter how much you earn, whether it’s $200,000 or $1,000,000, your happiness level is not much different than when you earn $80,000 a year.
Well, I guess if a rich person has too much money, he can’t spend that much.
This means that even if a rich person earning $100,000,000 took half of that money to the government, he would still have $5,000,000 left, so I think his happiness would not be that different.
Well, I’m not rich, so I honestly don’t know how rich people feel……
Of course, if you have worked hard and earned your money, you should receive it properly.
However, even if a person who earns $100,000,000 has only $50,000,000 left in the end, he will naturally be able to live comfortably and have plenty of room for luxury.
In fact, I think society as a whole would be richer if a rich person gave that money back to those who earn $3,000 or $4,000 a year.
We, common people, would be quite happy with just a $100 increase in our salaries.
Rich people have already experienced a lot of happiness, which is called “rewarding.”
I believe that in most cases, people who have more money than others are making more money than others through what they like to do, what they are good at, and what they want to do.
I don’t think they can make that kind of money unless they show their talent through what they like, what they are good at, and what they want to do and devote themselves to it continuously.
When I look at my acquaintances and celebrities, I feel that those who make a lot of money are those who are doing what they like, what they are good at, and what they want to do.
And when I see those people, I still think that successful people in life don’t need that much money.
Of course, they have the right to luxuries like buying expensive cars and living in nice houses.
It is up to the individual to decide how to spend the money he or she earns.
However, I think it is also true that rich people get a great sense of happiness in the form of “rewarding“ as well as money by doing what they like, what they are good at, and what they want to do.
What I’m trying to say is that rich people experience two kinds of happiness through their work: money and rewarding, while ordinary people who don’t get much money and rewarding feel less happiness in their lives compared to rich people, which I think that’s not fair.
If rich people can live with a sense of fulfillment every day, I think they don’t need that much money.
If that’s the case, I think it’s rather important to transfer a little bit of the rich people’s money to the poor people in order to remove the unfairness in society.
It can reduce the incidence of crime
Poverty and crime are linked.
When people are in poverty, they are more likely to commit crimes.
In addition, parents from poor families are more likely to abuse their children, and if poverty continues to increase, social instability will continue to grow.
I used to have a pretty messy mind, so I can understand how people with a messy mind can turn to crime.
I used to have a very poor heart, so I can understand the feelings of a person who is very poor and commits a crime.
I am sure that the person who did the wrong thing also had some circumstances.
Of course, I can’t affirm that they do bad things.
So, depending on the situation, any person can turn to crime……
Historically, as the number of people in poverty increased, the number of incidents such as theft increased and public safety deteriorated, so the social security system was started to solve the problem of poverty.
It is only natural, because people who are in need of food have no choice but to steal other people’s food in the end.
Therefore, I think we can say that redistribution of wealth is necessary for a safe and prosperous society, because redistributing wealth and reducing the number of poor people will help stabilize public safety.
Also, supporting the poor will eventually help save the lives of the rich.
In the French Revolution, poor citizens eventually executed the king.
Well, this may be a bit of an extreme example, but we never know what people will do when they are cornered, so I think it will be important for the stability of society to have an environment built in society where people do not have to worry about their livelihood to some extent.
By redistributing wealth, we protect the lives of the common people, or the rich, and stabilize society.
Necessary for society to become more prosperous
For example, if a person starts a business, but the company goes bankrupt and they have a lot of debt, it is not the end of their life, they can file for bankruptcy and receive welfare benefits to survive.
As long as we live in a society where wealth is redistributed, it is unlikely that we will starve to death.
And I’ve seen people living in cardboard boxes, drinking and gambling in the daytime
Not having to starve to death is a blessed environment, I think.
In this way, I believe that having an environment where people can live in peace and where people can boldly take on challenges will be important for the economy to grow.
If failure in a challenge leads directly to death, then the number of people who want to take on a difficult challenge will be extremely small.
An economist who advocates redistribution of wealth also said, “Only when a minimum level of survival is guaranteed can long-term planning, action, and challenges become possible. This is the necessity of redistributive policies to support economic growth.” As we see it, we can take on drastic challenges when we feel that we will not die even if we fail, and If the challenge results in the creation of new services and the enrichment of society, then I think redistributing wealth is very meaningful.
I believe that redistribution of wealth is necessary for society in order to grow the economy and achieve a more prosperous society.
So far, I have explained my thoughts on why redistribution of wealth is necessary.
In my opinion, redistribution of wealth is necessary for human beings to live as human beings.
I believe that redistribution of wealth is necessary for society to ensure that individuals do not choose to commit crime or suicide as much as possible due to poverty, and that individuals can live as fairly as possible regardless of their natural talents or environment.
If I was born very poor, and on the other hand, only the rich people in the world had a good time, I would really hate it!
Well, human beings are creatures that get angry when they see other people looking happy while they’re in a tough situation
Hmmm, I can understand that…
I believe that a good society is one in which each individual can live as a human being.
By the way, I’m not trying to denounce the rich, so please don’t misunderstand me lol
The existence of rich people is necessary for society, and I have ambitions to become rich and do many things on a daily basis, so I don’t deny the existence of rich people in the slightest!
Well, this is a little bit of a stiff subject, but thank you for reading this long! 😉