Money is often maligned as the root of all problems. As if it is self evident, it is often stated that the alarming disparities between the rich and poor must be bridged. This article attempts to understand money and its relation to poverty/prosperity of a nation.

Life evolved on the principle of survival of the fittest. When struggling for survival, other factors being equal, the strong overpowered the weak. To discourage physical force while seeking resources mankind developed trading. Initially, goods were exchanged. However, as activities multiplied, money was developed as a medium of exchange in societies. If not for trading/money, we would still physically fight for our daily needs. Exceptions not withstanding, societies that embraced free market eliminated such force to a large extent.

It is almost never realized that a currency by itself has no intrinsic value. If it really has a value governments can just print out currency notes and distribute among the poor to remove poverty. Only goods/services have intrinsic values. The value of a currency depends on a society’s output. The cost of goods is higher in a society with lesser output, than in one that has higher output. This implies that poor countries are not those without cash, but those without an output of goods. If goods are produced, any government can inject liquidity by printing currency. Claims that rich countries plundered their way to prosperity are hypocritical. Prosperity results from efficient trading systems. Without trading/production, plundering will result only in rich individuals, not rich countries.

Some countries are often qualified as “poor countries with rich people”. This apparent contradiction is explained when realized that prosperity is not a function of the amount of money, but of the amount of money “in action”. The capitalist countries are prosperous because most of their money is white, in banks/businesses, generating employment/goods. This also enhances the purchasing power of their currency. In contrast, some countries view money as a good, like food or other utilities, leading majority to hoard large sums of black money. This, while not generating employment/goods, causes inflation and poverty.

And then there are the champions of charity. Plainly, charity cannot eradicate suffering. It postpones it. The majority of the needy in the present world are able bodied; only they don’t have work. It is senseless to divert funds from creating job opportunities to charity. Charity promotes poverty, economic activities eradicate it. Charity must be viewed as a temporary measure, not as an end by itself. Or, maybe the charity champions fear that if their beloved “common” man’s problems vanish, their ticket to heaven will be canceled!

Politicians/film makers, ironically among the richest, propagate that the rich amassed wealth at the cost of poor/middle class and derive votes/collections from that. It would be hilarious, if it is not such a sad reflection of the public’s temptation to delude themselves of their worth. The people should stop cribbing about rich getting richer, and concentrate on the true measure of prosperity, an abundance of opportunities/goods. White wealth creates these; not the lazy black money. God, if s/he is there, would demand a hefty price for the ticket to heaven, whatever that is, and white wealth is the only accepted currency. It is his/her way to reward those that spread the greatest prosperity in their lives on earth.

Free Hit Counter

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of the ideas expressed were influenced by Ayn Rand