Bailouts & Accumulating wealth By: Ryan Kramer

Government bailout

The problems with bailouts Should Government Bail Out Big Banks? Dependency is dangerous, self-sustaining is the only way to advance growth in banking and prevent multiple future crises. Being so fearless that you are willing to put billions and even trillions of investors’ dollars at risk because you are so used to Uncle Sam preventing you from drowning is a problem, a huge problem. Banks need to become safer investments for the taxpayers and the public, taxes deserve to go to better places than bailouts.

Solutions: Too Big to Fail is Too Big to Exist Senator Bernie Sanders says this many times in his run for candidacy and has an entire proposition for a bill to split power into multiple banks. Possible solution (Khan Academy) Sal Khan reads an email from a business major and friend from a university that talks of quite a wild idea of relocating the $700 Billion that was spent to bail out banks to instead make 1-10 independent banks each with they own $70-$700 Billion to spend and create more diversity of loaning and interacting with new borrowers.

Can it ever be unjust to accumulate wealth? My short answer would be yes, the long answer would be definitely. There is certainly a point at which wealth no longer helps, there are countless studies on a correlation between wealth and happiness and where the point that wealth no longer contributes or provides happiness at useful rate is. Princeton Study Time In this study there are multiple countries looked at with each one having a different “max” happiness level at different annual incomes, US having the highest requirement. India only requires a $3,000 annual income before reaching an average happiness while US requires $75,000 to achieve maximum. To come back to my main point, there is a point where wealth means significantly less to impact your life and would be better suited for others or elsewhere. After the first $75,000 per year, each dollar has a much smaller impact on your overall happiness level.

Accumulation of Wealth There is a clear definite point at money has less of a factor on us. The US has one of the highest requirements to fulfill this financial independence. Other countries, an example being Bolivia or Egypt, need a fraction of this, between $5,000 and $10,000 to achieve the point at which anymore money has less of an impact. It is ‘unjust’ to earn more than $75,000 per year unless a great deal goes to charity or other suitable recipients to make your net total about $75,000. Exceptions include sustaining other people including a spouse and children and other dependents. A single person should not accumulate more than a reasonable amount of income so that it doesn’t impact them as it could someone else in more need of it. Utilitarianism theory comes into play to help the greater good in spite of a single person’s loss. In this case, one person would make less money so that many others gain. http://moneystepper.com/other-finance/the-relationship-between-wealth-and-happiness/