Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes most definetly

    If you were rich and say a poor person was at your door and you were too caught up in counting your money and the poor person had no home and very little food you could've helped if you weren't caught up in being selfish and that person died you would've could've should've.

    Posted by: y0y0
  • Limits on money

    There should be a limit on money because where are you going to put all your ''money'' in the bank or you are just going to leave it in hands and let some on steal it all but there should be a limit on what you make because if your bank is all full its going to be a different problem.

  • Yes there should.

    Having a limit on money may help people to one, not spend all their money on random things they do not need (the rich people who have huge houses that they can barely even fill the rooms with) and it will also help the economy eventually. The limit will allow us to spend it wisely.

  • If you earn it you should

    If you earn your money you should be able to spend and have it and it is just a game of luck you should be able to do what you wish and either have financial problems or be very successful in your life. You need to be able to do what you want

  • Riches do not necessarily equal greed

    Some of the wealthiest people are so because they are the most clever, and many of these clever people have figured out it it more rewarding to be generous than stingy. That's why there are so many wealthy philanthropists. Yes, there are selfish rich people, but guess what, there are selfish poor people, too. Limiting the amount of money someone can have does not change their character. Besides, who would like more than to be in charge of confiscating large amounts other people's money than a greedy person? Such a policy would only institutionalize and empower greed.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
TheOncomingStorm says2013-12-10T14:11:39.537
Do you mean how much money a person can own or how much money a nation may produce?