Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Blog Post Week...I dont remember all I know is that we are almost done

According to Dictionary.com, Wealth is:
1.a great quantity or store of money, valuable possessions, property, or other riches: the wealth of a city.
2. an abundance or profusion of anything; plentiful amount: a wealth of imagery.
3.Economics.
a.all things that have a monetary or exchange value.
b.anything that has utility and is capable of being appropriated or exchanged.
4.rich or valuable contents or produce: the wealth of the soil.
5.the state of being rich; prosperity; affluence: persons of wealth and standing.
So to summarize all these different definitions, wealth is having a lot. Ruggie’s argument how a wealthy state is one that has full employment and a wealthy individual is one with a job has some merit but just having a job does not make one “wealthy” in my book. Having a job is very important to an individual but it is not the only thing that makes a person wealthy. Wealth for the individual has many levels: emotional, financial, social. Emotional wealth is when a person is happy. If a person is happy they have enough to consider themselves wealthy. Social wealth is having a well structured strong social support system that can help you up when you fall. Financial wealth is the most obvious kind of wealth, the more money you have the wealthier you are. I am wealthy but I only am socially and emotionally wealthy but I do not consider myself financially wealthy. As I said in class, I have a great family and good friends (most of you are included in that list), so i feel that I am lucky and wealthy in that aspect, but when it comes to finances, I am pushing the “lower middle class.” When my mother is struggling to pay the mortgage or when I am relying on Federal and private loans to pay for my education and have to worry about paying for next year. When my family can barely afford to pay the bills, I don’t consider myself wealthy. But wealth is more than a job, it about how one is emotionally, socially and financially.

When it comes to the wealth of the state, full employment is impractical for wealth. For a state to be productive it needs to keep up with technological changes. Full employment would cause a state to become too concerned with getting people in jobs. With people wanting more jobs, machines would have to be replaced with people. We would be going backwards technologically. Why would a state that wants to be wealthy want to go technologically backwards? Full employment though giving everyone a job means going in the wrong direction in technology and falling behind. A wealthy nation is one where the people of the nation have wealth. The US is wealthy because most of the population is living above most people in the world. Though Washington, DC has a high poverty level, most of the African nations are worse off.

Wealth, I still don’t have an exact definition. Wealth, in my belief, is all relative. Like the “Mainwaring Line”, the “Schnoor Line” is what I can judge wealth on. When it comes to the wealth of a state, that has to do with the wealth of its people. Thus I am done and to all of those who voted McCain, I'm sorry but it was a good fight, to those Obama supporters, YES WE DID!!!

No comments: