Best way to spend $100 million
VS
If you had control of $100 million and had to spend it one of the 2 following ways, which would you choose and why?
Spend it to build a yacht for a billionaire
Spend it to feed poor people
These are the 2 choices available, which one would it be?
Feed the Poor
Side Score: 22
|
 |
Build a Yacht
Side Score: 28
|
|
|
|
|
I'd feed the poor, but then again I can barely swim and don't know how to sail a yacht. Plus the docking fees for such a beast would bankrupt me. Granted I could sell the yacht and that money would really help my family. But then I also know if my wife found out I had passed up helping out an enormous number of people just for our own benefit she would think I'd made the wrong decision. So selling the yacht in the end doesn't really help my family after all. Side: Feed the Poor
I say feed the poor and get them a house but they gone have to work so they can pay the bills that i'm not going to do so i will buy them a house and some food cause they really need it and if you said the other choice you got a problem so i say no i would feed the homeless because i'm nice like that and i not a dummy like the people that chose the other choice so yeah and i'm not selfish so Side: Feed the Poor
I would build thousands of, not yachts but cheap barges. Put all the poor losers on them. Cast them out to sea and payh armed mercenary pirates not to allow them back to shore. EVENTUALLY THE POOR WOULD STARVE AT SEA. maybe have to resort to eating each other? LOL...I just read a book on whalers doing this when in lifeboats after a whale sunk their ship. The event inspired Melville to write Moby Dick. Anyway..yeah..cast the poor to sea. Except take some of the hot women and make them my sex slaves. Then I would enjoy life with the rest of my money and my wealthy elitfe friends. We would institute an oligarchy. The poor are so depressing. I would rather not have to deal with them. I rather fancy the Hindu caste system, like in India. Where they don't help beggars cuz they figure it is their karmic lot in life. Makes sense to me. I would drink champagne and eat lobster and caviar everyday and fuck my sexs slaves till I tried of them. Then they too would be put to sea. I would put video camd on the barges so I could laugh at the poor while they resorted to cannibalism and chaos and death. Then I would eat another lobster tale. Hail Satan!! Side: Feed the Poor
|
4
points
When building a yacht, you create all kinds of economic opportunity and JOBS. The raw materials used in building a boat- metal ore that is mined; the oil that is drilled; the transportation thereof; refinement and fabrication; assemblage of boat; designers; electricians; plumbers; the ship yard; bureaucracy consisting of secretaries, bookkeepers, accountants, shop keeper, janitorial etc. and on and on... thousands of jobs are created building this yacht and people are getting paid for being productive. A tax base is also created that helps fund the social programs liberals love. It's win, win scenario. People get paid for productivity and food gets put on their tables to feed their family. GO YACHT!!! Side: Build a Yacht
Feeding the poor requires paying farmers to get all the food. All the same transportation costs go into the pockets of the truck drivers. That much food would need all the same bookkeeping. So, spending on food would generate the same taxes to fund liberal social programs. Plus, distributing the food will mean we can cut programs that give food stamps, which are abused. The food is a win win win. Side: Feed the Poor
3
points
But the same happens when you pay people to be productive, like building the yacht. What you said is still in play. People have jobs and get off welfare. Your way makes them dependent on someone. Something for nothing does no one any good in the long run. Your distribution of food is tantamount to food stamps and welfare. Side: Build a Yacht
2
points
1
point
Wrong. A good deal of conservative politicians and economists still believe in the inherent veracity of trickle down economics. And for good reason....it DOES work. That is, for the most part. Obviously not all wealthy folks disseminate some of their capital to the middle and lower class econ bracket. But enough do so that this theory is a viable one. One that has been proven in history. Several times. As recently as the post 2008 subprime meltdown. Or I should say, as recently as in the wake of it, in around 2012, when wealthy business owners began hiring again and kick-started the recovery. The 1980s were also a decade of middle class prosperity fueled by trickle down economics. The theory is alive and well. The man who might be your next president also believes firmly in it. As do all of us who know anything about Friedmanian economics. Or.....we could debate this topic? Feel like losing? LOL Let me know Side: Feed the Poor
3
points
This is a no contest argument. The only possible answer is to buy a yacht, fill it with beautiful women and champagne. If you wasted $100 million on feeding life's losers, it would be like throwing cookies to a herd of elephants. What happens when they've gobbled their way through $100 million worth of grubstakes. ? They become hungry again and are looking for another sucker and all the while you're broke, busted, skint. Your cry would be, ''hey buddy can you spare a dime''?What an idiot you'd feel joining the flea ridden low lives in the benefits queue hoping for a bowl of soup and a piece of bread. Never give a sucker a break, that's my motto. Look after number one and make sure you don't stand on number twos. Side: Build a Yacht
2
points
2
points
1
point
|
