Which problem will you choose to solve?

[Queentoshi]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

[Findingnemo]

Solving the problem of one rich person can save thousands of jobs so it depends on who is that rich person and what is their problem.

If you see more replies that say to solve the problems of more poor people then its not a wonder because that is the right thing from an ethical Point of View.

[blockman]

The rich have become rich because most of them are problem solvers. While being rich, the next level of having problems is likely about the management of their wealth which is easy IMHO.
While the poor, there are tons of problems that people are dealing with every day. It looks easy but it's not when the ratio of rich and poor isn't par at all.
We admit it or not, there are poorer than rich people, and problems that are being dealt with by most of them can't be tackled easily. Putting this on a serious note, I've been there and still trying to survive. Before helping the poor, I want to help myself first.

[rat03gopoh]

Rich and poor people have their own problems according to their own portions. If they choose me to hear their problems, of course I welcome. But won't provide any solution if it doesn't suit my knowledge and experience preference. I just don't want to add more problems because of wrong advice, and I don't want to become another corner of the problem.

[Knight Hider]

What problems do rich people have that they can't solve with money? Love? Can't decide which car to buy, and the garage only fits 12? How to avoid paying that 0.1% in taxes?

--Knight Hider

[Odusko]

What problems do rich people have that they can't solve with money? Love? Can't decide which car to buy, and the garage only fits 12? How to avoid paying that 0.1% in taxes?

--Knight Hider

Have you ever heard the phrase,  (the rich also cry)?
The rich have problems that money can't solve and some of the things you mentioned can't be bought with money,  such as love,  health and other life challenges that are beyond money but could be solved by human intervention where the rich will need to employ another hand.
Solving rich people's problems is equivalent to solving the poor mases problem,  because both problems depend o the individual unique needs,  but is easier to solve a rich man's problem than solving the poor cases since with the rich you have money as a tool to work with in solving the problem

[Lorence.xD]

For sure the most common option people would choose is to solve the problem of the poor. Cause rich already has been rich so its possible the problems of the rich for example is his business failed or his company went bankrupt something like that. If the rich losses his company the staffs and employees would lose their jobs so it's also a worse case scenario. For the poor, it's literally a help that people who would lose hope on living and can't provide their essential needs if the focus of the government (my country). Thing is poor might not have the knowledge to get out of their situation unlike the rich one, they would think a solution to their problem since they have the knowledge. They still have the chance to recover even without pointing them out what to do.

[Dzwaafu11]

Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I will prefer to solve the poor person's problems because the rich person is already rich, and the rich person has what he wants around them, so what will be his problem that he cannot solve by himself? I believe he can solve it, so I don’t think I will help a rich person and leave the poor one, and you can see that I may have $100 to help 10 individuals who are poor, so which rich person will you  even give this amount to and tell him you want to support him? They won’t even listen to you, so I’ll prefer to help the poor person than the rich person.

Have you ever heard the phrase,  (the rich also cry)?
The rich have problems that money can't solve and some of the things you mentioned can't be bought with money,  such as love,  health and other life challenges that are beyond money but could be solved by human intervention where the rich will need to employ another hand.

Yeah, it’s true, but you know, even if the rich can cry, but most will be a health issue, and even if it is a health issue, they will still solve it using money by finding someone who will take care of their health problems, whereas the poor individuals may not have the money even if they experience that type of issue. And you know, I may be the only person a poor person can be lucky to have as a helper, so if I don’t and choose to help the rich ones, it will make no sense. So I think that helping the poor will be more reasonable than helping the rich. Although both are good, I think the one that will be more helpful is the poor.

[letteredhub]

The problem of a poor man is all tied to money and that's an easy problem to solve when the money become available, but for a rich man to have a problem and his wealth can't solve it then that problem is beyond money problem. Invariably what am saying is that poor people's problem is easier to solve in as much as money is at hand. Their problem is 99% related to money but for that of a rich man who already have money and yet can't solve it then that problem is something beyond the ordinary. So therefore, I'll prefer solving the poor's problem cause they're mostly resolvable than those of the rich .

[avikz]

It depends on the ticket size and potential market. From the business perspective, it always makes sense to Target a bigger market. So the market is bigger for the poor man's issue but the ticket size will be low. So the game is to sell to mass. On the other hand, a rich man's problem will give you a higher ticket size but small customer base.

Personally I will be more interested in solving poor man's problems for business because it will allow me to serve the mass.

[ZAINmalik75]

Well that's depend on the problems of both but I do not help anyone on the basis that either they are rich or poor. If any person in my sight need help and I know I can help me and make him/her trouble free then I love to help them. But mostly I belong to a poor and middle class family and people around me are also struggling and I have seen many influencers and Free lancers who are giving there time back to there community even if they are charging them.

But still they are trying very hard and from the core of there heart they are opening many doors for the poor make some money. If by poor and rich you mean the lack and not lack of money respectively. If someone is rich but still have problems then that's not a something new because every time money cannot solve the problems. But I have seen many problems of the big rich people which can only be solved by some person near to them and poor do not want to go near them. I do not know the mindsets but this statement is not for every poor as I like my time to spend among rich ones because most of the time they are not talking about money but whenever I sit among poor they are always talking about money. But this case is sometime opposite too. So do no take any thing for sure on my words.

[Faisal2202]

I can see the voting only five people voted yet as the topic is still new. So let's see what other people think of it. But I can make assumptions from the current data that most of people are willing to help the poor because they deserve more help due to other problems they are facing amid financial problems and most of the time rich do not face financial problems like the way the poor face.

But in my opinion, we should help each other until we could do it or until we have the potential or energy to do it amid the difference between poor and rich.

But, if I have to answer your query I would help anyone before knowing or getting into the research of finding that either he or she is poor or rich. Let's say I saw a child or young boy or girl on the road who have broken his bike. Looking for help then I will definitely stop to help them. If I have enough resources then I will if not then I will still try to help them.  

[irhact]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Solving the problem of the rich individual means you'll get profits quickly as the rich will be willing to pay big for their problem to be solevd. One problem of the rich is security because they alway feel insecure therefore if you start up a personal security agency you can charge them big. The poor individuals mightn't have big money to pay you but you can use the advantage of their numbers therefore if you get millions of poor people to use the service you're offering, you'll get rich.

We have problems that both the poor and the rich need solution to and that's where we should be focusing on as if you can find that problem then you can get customers of both the poor and the rich and that's the problem I'll prefer to solve as it has more advantage.

[uneng]

What problems do rich people have that they can't solve with money? Love? Can't decide which car to buy, and the garage only fits 12? How to avoid paying that 0.1% in taxes?

--Knight Hider

Have you ever heard the phrase,  (the rich also cry)?
The rich have problems that money can't solve and some of the things you mentioned can't be bought with money,  such as love,  health and other life challenges that are beyond money but could be solved by human intervention where the rich will need to employ another hand.
Solving rich people's problems is equivalent to solving the poor mases problem,  because both problems depend o the individual unique needs,  but is easier to solve a rich man's problem than solving the poor cases since with the rich you have money as a tool to work with in solving the problem

Actually, life isn't always smooth for rich people on the financial sphere. One thing is to have a financial empire, another thing is to manage it and keep it thriving. The rich face challenges on their businesses that can't be solved by themselves, so they need smart and competent employees who will work assisting them on these matters. That is where OP's question fits, I think.

In my opinion the poors always benefit from the help rich people receive, because the rich are the only ones who have funds to invest in technology and development through qualified labor force, which reach the poor classes (in minor scale, and never totally) after all. So it's like that saying: can't live with them, can't live without them.

[Fortify]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Solving the "problem" of the rich could also solve the problem of the poor, so it's probably best to target there if you wanted the help the world. While the capitalist system is the best of the worst options available to us, in that it satiates what seems to be a basic human desire to compete and accumulate, it needs to be strongly regulated since billions of us share this planet together. Lack of regulation is probably the root problem and one that billionaires love to exist in, as it helps them get richer. Lobbying should be illegal for starters, because while it should be allowed by individuals with the right system, it is far too often abused by rich people to make them even richer by maintaining the status quo or even stripping back other laws designed to benefit the majority instead of the few.

[Gozie51]

I will prefer that the poor are helped to solve their problem. The reason for my choice is that the poor dominate the society and most of the struggle to better the society is that the poor might also benefit good and enjoy their world, so if we have the opportunity to solve some problem why not it be for the poor. The population is majorly of the poor and solving majority of the world's population problem means more poor people will benefit and the poor they say can't help themselves on like the rich who are connected in high places. For example regards to some general amenities like water, food, shelter , the rich can provide them adequately for themselves.

[lionheart78]

I will choose to solve my own problem.  Why bother solving other people's problems when we ourselves have problems?  It is best to focus on personal growth and when all is perfectly done, that is the time to focus on other problem.

It is better to be self-sufficient than the person who solves other people's problems while depending on others to meet our needs.

Poor people have the capability, what missing from them is the opportunity, and this opportunity can only be given by the government who has the funds and the power to implement things.  I will think of this thing when I become a government official because it hurt more when the help is half-baked.

[Abu-Naim]

Depending on the type of problem that needs my attention. Sometimes you will consider solving the poor people's problem before the rich once because you know that the rich people might have alternative ways of solving their problems unlike the poor people who may have no way to bring an end to their problems.

On the other hand, solving the rich people's problems may be helpful to the poor people if the rich people are providing for them through given them jobs to be doing or supporting them.

[Ndabagi01]

I will go out and support the poor five times more than I will think about supporting the rich first. This life is about uplifting others who are desperately in need, which I believe the wealthy have no trouble doing because they've already developed a network that can always intercede for them should things start to collapse.

The underprivileged always need someone to lift them up and help them realise their full potential. It is not always necessary to give people money, but rather to place them in an environment where they can be productive. Instead of providing them fish to eat, teach them how to catch fish so they can be self-dependent the next time.

[Popkon6]

If I want to talk about problem solving, I can definitely solve a rich man's problem. Then he can pay me a lot of money and with that money I can help hundreds of poor people. And also to say that hundreds of poor people need the help of a rich man with the help money, so helping the rich man means helping the poor man without any hesitation. I have seen in my real life that helping rich people earns more money. The rich are busy with a lot of tension because they have wealth and need more wealth. But solving the right problems of any human being is the best work of human beings

[Uruhara]

If you expect a lot of profit then fixing the problems of the rich is the most appropriate thing to do. But that doesn't mean we don't care about the problems experienced by poor people. Because our goal is to make more money so we can build a strong economy that can help the problems of the poor in the end.

We profit from the rich and we use the profits we get to help solve the problems that the poor have. Well, because at this time every problem solving must be supported by strong finances. So our main focus is to build strong finances before solving the problems of the grassroots. We can start by solving the problems of the rich and then move on to solving the problems of the poor.

[Darker45]

By service I suppose you mean some kind of business. If this is so, then everything would depend on the market. Everything boils down to revenue. It doesn't matter whether you're solving the problems of the rich or the problems of the poor. What matters is that you're making a good profit.

If by catering to the rich, you're making a bigger income, then I'd choose it. But if by catering to the needs of the poor, the income is much higher, then I'd be choosing that.

If this is a question of charity, however, I'd be giving an unequivocal answer. I'd rather be solving the problems of the poor. They're mostly problems on their basic needs.

[rikybrosh]

i think if I have ability and opportunity I will solve the problem of the rich people as they have a lot of money it will be a lot easier to make big profit.usually rich people do not care about the price of the service, even many of them thinking about the prestige value that they can get.

[Xampeuu]

By service I suppose you mean some kind of business. If this is so, then everything would depend on the market. Everything boils down to revenue. It doesn't matter whether you're solving the problems of the rich or the problems of the poor. What matters is that you're making a good profit.

If by catering to the rich, you're making a bigger income, then I'd choose it. But if by catering to the needs of the poor, the income is much higher, then I'd be choosing that.

If this is a question of charity, however, I'd be giving an unequivocal answer. I'd rather be solving the problems of the poor. They're mostly problems on their basic needs.

indeed it basically depends on our intentions at the beginning, in terms of the amount of income, then indeed the main choice is which one gives more income, but if our intention is to do charity, then put aside the aspect of the amount of income. basically everything can bring the same happiness, as long as we work according to our conscience, so that this does not bring heartache which leads to dishonesty in carrying out a job, and when that happens, then the results are also not satisfactory

[xSkylarx]

Population-wise, there are more poor people in the world, meaning there are more customers, which means goods for business. You can't say that they don't have money, but they will still find a way to purchase them, so you'll still be gaining profit from them, and you can also help them in a way that you are also earning. I remember someone who is selling food for a nearby school, and his food is so cheap that those poor students can still eat even though they are only short on their allowance.

[dothebeats]

A lot of aspects may come from and with this, but solving the problem of the rich gives you an advantage. First of all, there are the resources and connections that rich people have that can seriously help in times of struggle and problems. Moreover, the power of money and influence can do a lot, which is a big advantage. Lastly, depending on the problem, solving the problem of the rich can even help others along the way or those who are depending on them.

[pooya87]

Neither.

The real problem to solve is the problem that created the poor and the rich in first place. So the fundamental economical, social and other issues that led to the class gap in first place needs to be solved so that we no longer have anything called "the poor" that need their problems solved.

Otherwise we end up with examples like United States where the gap is so massive that there are only a tiny 1% that are categorized as ultra rich and the rest of the 99% of the population are categorized as poor and lower class with nary a middle class in sight.

[HajiBagi]

In my opinion, helping the poor with their problems is better because when they have no one to turn to for financial assistance, the wealthy are the ones who step in. I don't believe that the wealthy have any problems that they are unable to resolve; the only issue that they are unable to do so with regards to is saving lives because, in my opinion, money cannot save lives and God wishes that person would perish. Nevertheless, assisting the wealthy can also help you become successful. For instance, if you were jobless and assisted a wealthy individual who was responsible and got you a job or other favourable circumstances, your life would be changed.

But if it comes to providing financial assistance or helping someone in need, I would prioritise the poor because they currently experience a lot of hardship while the rich people don't give a damn. In fact, I believe that the rich are very wicked in this day and age because they refuse to help you if you need it and most of them don't care about the poor. I shall, therefore, aid the poor person rather than the rich person.
 

[rachael9385]

Nowadays the problems of the rich is bigger than the problems of the poor keep their money aside, every rich person has bigger problems from the first day they made their first millions, if you have money the whole family and relatives will always come to you to seek your help, the poor believes that the rich people always have money even when they don't have and if you don't help them financially they will not be in good terms with you and even in business the rich will always put effort to make more money even if the risk is high they will always want to profits from it so they will not get broke (poor) for people to laugh at them.
For the poor after trying all their efforts to be rich and they don't, they will just give up and look for what Minor things that can bring food to their tables things like farming or other local business trading in the market.

[yhiaali3]

From a moral point of view, of course, solving the problems of the poor is best, but from a rational and practical point of view, solving the problems of the rich is best.

So surely the answers will differ according to the nature of each person, some people are overcome with emotion and pity the poor even if they know that they will not get much money for their service or perhaps they will never get it.

Others overcome their mental thinking over emotional thinking, so they will definitely choose to solve the problems of the rich because it is the best way to get money, and it may have more benefit to society from their point of view because the rich provide jobs for the poor.

[Hanadawa]

i think if I have ability and opportunity I will solve the problem of the rich people as they have a lot of money it will be a lot easier to make big profit.usually rich people do not care about the price of the service, even many of them thinking about the prestige value that they can get.

Yes actually this is a simple problem. Solving the problems of the rich then they will benefit the poor. My question is what kind of problem is the Op referring to in this thread? Is it a problem like helping a rich man's business to grow and then it will bring benefits such as opening new jobs and the poor around him will benefit? If so, I totally agree with this.

But the problem here is that sometimes there are some rich people who are too greedy, or rich people who are capitalists so no matter how we help them, what they do is put dollars in their pockets and give little benefit to the poor.

Maybe we can think about helping rich people with the record that they are rich people who have good morals and attitudes so they are kind enough to help the poor.

[Patrol69]

If a person is financially well then that person can solve 90% of the problems with money but it is very difficult to solve the problems of those who don't have money. If I have enough money and if I get a chance I will definitely try to solve the problems of poor people. Poor people who are there live with thousands of problems because to solve the problems they must have a lot of money which they don't have that is why they are poor. If a rich person and a poor person get into a legal entanglement, surely the rich person can easily get out of that entanglement, but it is not possible for a poor person to get out of that problem so easily. A person who has money will appoint a very good lawyer for him but a person who does not have wealth cannot appoint a good lawyer for himself even if he wants to and as a result here also a poor person will fail to solve his problem.

[RockBell]

The rich have become rich because most of them are problem solvers. While being rich, the next level of having problems is likely about the management of their wealth which is easy IMHO.
While the poor, there are tons of problems that people are dealing with every day. It looks easy but it's not when the ratio of rich and poor isn't par at all.
We admit it or not, there are poorer than rich people, and problems that are being dealt with by most of them can't be tackled easily. Putting this on a serious note, I've been there and still trying to survive. Before helping the poor, I want to help myself first.

That is what social entrepreneurs do, they look for a particular problem and invest a lot of ideas in it, take Elon, for instance, coming up with Tesla an electric car to not only help in reducing cars that use fuel but also to reduce emissions very smart move, just charge and drive, that is the logic I see rich people do they search for a problem and the solving the problem comes with a lot of money, there are still a lot of problems out there that needs a solution, look at the cell phone today it has reduced sending of letters and has made communication easy, we are benefiting from peoples solving a problem, surviving these days is not easy, but we just have to keep supporting one another.

[inthelongrun]

When I was still a young kid studying, I used to think about becoming a useful human being by contributing something. There were times when I think about how to solve problems and issues be it world, national, or local level. I think about how important and how to become important in this world. And then I graduated college, got my first job, and grow mature. What did I learn? I learned about thinking about myself, building my own career, and being successful with it. As the years go by, we have our own struggles in life.

So it's like we need to become very successful first before giving a fck about the problem of the rich and even the poor. Only when you become successful that you deserved to speak about solutions for the rich or the poor. Otherwise, it's just talking without walking.

[AicecreaME]

It depends if I have the capability of solving the problems of poor people, I am willingly going to solve it for them.

The problems of poor people are much worst than the problem of the rich people, because they've suffered a lot of challenges in life. They always thinking how they should eat 3 times a day when day can only afford eating once a day, or in a bad day, they don't even eat a decent meal, how are they going to get a job if they don't have the qualifications to be hired, how are they going to survive if they don't know anymore what to do to feed themselves or their families, and many more.

[slapper]

Is it not clear? Only a weak-minded individual would focus on solving the problems of the poor and expect to achieve big-league success. I've always stated that if you want to win big, you need to think big. Poor people? Although they do have difficulties, that is not where the actual money lies

The wealthy have issues that warrant attention and for which they are prepared to pay top bucks. Being logical is preferable to being heartless. The small ones will follow if you concentrate on the larger fish. Make sure you have the resources and ability to help the needy if you honestly want to. Start with the wealthy; they will help finance your empire

[xSkylarx]

From a moral point of view, of course, solving the problems of the poor is best, but from a rational and practical point of view, solving the problems of the rich is best.

So surely the answers will differ according to the nature of each person, some people are overcome with emotion and pity the poor even if they know that they will not get much money for their service or perhaps they will never get it.

Others overcome their mental thinking over emotional thinking, so they will definitely choose to solve the problems of the rich because it is the best way to get money, and it may have more benefit to society from their point of view because the rich provide jobs for the poor.

As long as you can solve a problem, then it is good because it doesn't mean that if you focus on poor people, you won't gain a profit. It is almost the same with rich people because there are many people that still need to buy it because it can help them, which is also the same with rich people, except that those rich ones are expensive and you can easily accumulate a profit. But again, most businesses right now have a purpose other than earning profit, which is why they are targeting both.

[uswa56]

When I was still a young kid studying, I used to think about becoming a useful human being by contributing something. There were times when I think about how to solve problems and issues be it world, national, or local level. I think about how important and how to become important in this world. And then I graduated college, got my first job, and grow mature. What did I learn? I learned about thinking about myself, building my own career, and being successful with it. As the years go by, we have our own struggles in life.

So it's like we need to become very successful first before giving a fck about the problem of the rich and even the poor. Only when you become successful that you deserved to speak about solutions for the rich or the poor. Otherwise, it's just talking without walking.

That's realistic, but I found some people who think that way, accompanied by themselves too, because when we think about a problem, it doesn't always have to be financial, sometimes our thoughts can help many people.
The problem of poverty is probably more people think about, actually it depends on the environment but personally I started to get interested in it because I saw it firsthand, and I've joined a community that cares about poverty, they do a lot of things that help but I see a lot of people doing it these good things are not from among the rich but they are people who devote their energy and thoughts to help these problems.

[Oneandpure]

Become rich person not only can solve with thousand problem you face but also can helped many people need money, difference when becoming poor person we get difficult how to get good healthy service until problem with education for our children. I don't think have respond will choose becoming poor people because we know how difficult our live without have much money. Realistic with life situation right now, we need money on every side when getting problem with government money can solve easily with our problem.

One tradition in my country when becoming rich person, you have more connected every where, easily to get friend and family are closing with  you although you don't know them.

[Peanutswar]

I choose to solve the problem of the poor people, this decision may vary because some people doesn't want to have a change and they want to stick to what they currently have, somehow some poor people want changes in their life and there's nothing wrong to help them but in some point we cannot deny there's a mindset of the poor becomes selfish and greedy sometimes of course they didn't experience those kind of life before so they want to do with it now and some of them didn't have manage properly their money cause to brings back them to become poor. This is the reason why the rich people continuously become rich because of this kind of mindset.

[icalical]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Since this is an economic board, so I assume what you mean by problem is economic problems. So then, rich people have money and I think half (or even more) of their economic problem is solved, that's why I would choose to solve poor's people problem because I think it's more urgent.

[lovesmayfamilis]

If I want to talk about problem solving,

Don't overestimate yourself. What you think you can decide for a rich person means that anyone can do it, and therefore it is not a problem for a rich person.
Look at Elon Musk; he always has a "headache" about something, then he needs a flight to the moon, and then he urgently needs to rename Twitter, something that is already working in principle. Are you able to solve his problems? I doubt. He makes them every morning.
But if we talk about the poor, then many of them will not be able to live in wealth, even if they are helped with money. They have their own views on life, and there are a lot of poor people who simply do not want to live better. Just talking about desire is not enough; there are many examples in history of how guys from poor families achieved success on their own.
Therefore, the poor and the rich are the normal balance of the world; they were and will be. As it is impossible to solve all the problems of the rich. Likewise, one cannot help eradicate poverty.
Buddhists would probably call it karma.

[bettercrypto]

The more you choose to help the rich especially with a good heart for others, we can see that it can be more helpful people than poor people. It is also the beauty of the rich who are always positive even when they are losing because they always look at the future.

And when we put the poor people first, the person who helps themselves will also be difficult and have trouble with these people because we can see the negative mindsets and hear what they have to say.

[edy_58]

I will go out and support the poor five times more than I will think about supporting the rich first. This life is about uplifting others who are desperately in need, which I believe the wealthy have no trouble doing because they've already developed a network that can always intercede for them should things start to collapse.

The underprivileged always need someone to lift them up and help them realise their full potential. It is not always necessary to give people money, but rather to place them in an environment where they can be productive. Instead of providing them fish to eat, teach them how to catch fish so they can be self-dependent the next time.

I am very interested in your choice and how to solve your problem, if rich people get a problem, of course they will find it easier to deal with it on their own because they can easily find solutions and of course there are many people closest to them who will help them, very different from poor people when they face a problem they will try to solve it themselves and very few people who will help.

[Zlantann]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

You can make a profit from servicing the needs of any segment or class of the society. There are more poor people in the world so your service can reach out to many people. Even if the profit is less, their high population will increase the profit. The rich might offer profit but they are few.

Which problem will you choose to solve?

Both!!
Solving the problems of the rich will give me the privilege of meeting the needs of the poor. I don't see business as a means of profit-making only. It could also be a means of income distribution or assisting your community.

Neither.

The real problem to solve is the problem that created the poor and the rich in first place. So the fundamental economical, social and other issues that led to the class gap in first place needs to be solved so that we no longer have anything called "the poor" that need their problems solved.

Otherwise we end up with examples like United States where the gap is so massive that there are only a tiny 1% that are categorized as ultra rich and the rest of the 99% of the population are categorized as poor and lower class with nary a middle class in sight.

Hahaha! Classic response, but capitalists don't think this way. Their cardinal intention is to make a profit from business regardless of the consequences. They don't care about promoting equality or equitable distribution of scarce resources. It is a shame that the middle class is gradually disappearing from society because of the widening gap between the poor and the rich.

[Davidvictorson]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Easy. I will solve the problem of the poor. If I solve the problem of the poor have technically solved the problem of the rich. Statistically, most of the people in prison are poor people. Their economic status and the environment they grew up in played a huge role. If I get the poor jobs and get them employed, get them off the streets, get them off gangs, get them to go to school and acquire an education or a skill, get them to have a mindset reorientation then I have solved the problem of the rich which is security. Once the crime rate and insecurity is down the problem of the rich is solved already.

[Plaguedeath]

In this world there's always a winner and loser, it means even you're want to solve a problem of poor people, there's always a new problem and you can't fix it. It's true there are many people can upgrade their level from poor to rich or poor to middle, but there are a lot people are still stay in poor. I'd choose to fix rich people problem because it's either require very high technical skill or something related with relationship.

[bayu7adi]

Fascinatingly, both the wealthy and the less fortunate do grapple with their own sets of challenges. And whoever possesses solutions for their predicaments is essentially engaged in a business endeavor.

Alright, it's a conviction that most would prefer dealing with the affluent, as they tend to yield greater benefits in terms of financial gain. The work becomes streamlined, yet the income skyrockets. At first glance, I'd even buy into this illusion as a business objective.

However, after some time, I revert to contemplating that the wealthy don't always bring advantages to the world. Some are mirrors of greed and hubris. Associating with them doesn't necessarily illuminate the true essence of friendship. It might sound a touch naive, but aiding the less fortunate in resolving their dilemmas could possess a more compelling allure.

Finding fulfillment in the struggle itself and becoming a benefactor to those in greater need holds more value than relentlessly chasing money to the grave.

[YOSHIE]

As far as I know there are many things that must be resolved between the rich and the poor, the two elements of society have various things that must be resolved, whether the way of thinking, economic, social, life and so on.

If we talk about the gap here for problems that must be solved from an economic perspective, of course the first thing that must be solved is the rich.

It is adjusted to the facts below, as I have read.

The main key to efforts to overcome socio-economic disparities is to provide access for every community to take advantage of existing social facilities, as well as provide equal opportunities for all people to develop and improve their economy.

The bottom line: to achieve inequality in terms of the economy and overcome it, of course the government must participate and be responsible for the rich, so that it creates.

Social inequality does not only occur in the economic sector, but also in the fields of education, technology, health, and the quality of human resources.

By overcoming the rich, automatically the poor will have a positive impact in solving the problems that exist in the lives of the economically rich.

[ajiz138]

I will choose to solve my own problem.  Why bother solving other people's problems when we ourselves have problems?  It is best to focus on personal growth and when all is perfectly done, that is the time to focus on other problem.

It is better to be self-sufficient than the person who solves other people's problems while depending on others to meet our needs.

Poor people have the capability, what missing from them is the opportunity, and this opportunity can only be given by the government who has the funds and the power to implement things.  I will think of this thing when I become a government official because it hurt more when the help is half-baked.

Agree with this statement! why do we take care of others while our own finances have not been addressed, we even often have problems even this will not be separated from financial problems.
Make yourself prosperous if you are already established then help others to give what you can.

YES only the government can solve this problem about the rich and the poor we can't do enough while the government has the responsibility for it with the policies it makes, remember it's too complicated to be an official even if you are sick of the uneven distribution.

[Blowon]

what should be solved from the problem of rich people, they are capable enough in many ways, why should we help someone who is basically capable in financial terms. if it's poor people, even they only think about how to eat today or tomorrow, they don't think about how they will enjoy their life. I think it's more appropriate to help the poor first.

[red4slash]

what should be solved from the problem of rich people, they are capable enough in many ways, why should we help someone who is basically capable in financial terms. if it's poor people, even they only think about how to eat today or tomorrow, they don't think about how they will enjoy their life. I think it's more appropriate to help the poor first.

What you said is not wrong at all, but I was thinking about something like this. If we solve the problems of the rich first, will it be able to help the poor? Especially since they have the financial ability which is arguably one of the problems of the poor.
And if we help the poor first, it's not likely to help the rich much. Let's say we are in a situation that is closely related to financial problems here.

Now if in a situation like this then I would strongly consider that. I mean when they (the rich) when the problem is over can help for the poor, then I would do that first.

[Cryptomultiplier]

For me, solving the problem of the poor or the rich has to come with a catch.

To solve the problem of the poor could just be as simple as providing a good medium to educate them, as well as opening their eyes to new ways of doing things. The reward may come in form of verbal gratitude and if it's something they had to pay so little or next to nothing to get inorder to live better, as compared to other costly ones, you have simply won their hearts for a lifetime.

To solve the problem of the rich however, could be same scenario as I highlighted in my second stanza, but it might be rewarding more in terms of cash, favors, and appointments. Still, it may not be fulfilling as being an angel to someone poor and undeserving.

[flyingcarpet]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Both the rich and the poor have their own problems. If it will provide a benefit to the society when we solve a rich person's problem, I can prefer it. The factor that determines the choice I will make is about whether it will benefit the society or not.

But we have some social values. In general, efforts are made to solve the problems of the poor. Because the poor may not have enough opportunities to solve their own problems. If solving a poor person's problem will benefit society, I will.

As a preference, I would like to solve the problems of both parties, but I prefer the one that will provide the most social benefit.

[blockman]

The rich have become rich because most of them are problem solvers. While being rich, the next level of having problems is likely about the management of their wealth which is easy IMHO.
While the poor, there are tons of problems that people are dealing with every day. It looks easy but it's not when the ratio of rich and poor isn't par at all.
We admit it or not, there are poorer than rich people, and problems that are being dealt with by most of them can't be tackled easily. Putting this on a serious note, I've been there and still trying to survive. Before helping the poor, I want to help myself first.

That is what social entrepreneurs do, they look for a particular problem and invest a lot of ideas in it, take Elon, for instance, coming up with Tesla an electric car to not only help in reducing cars that use fuel but also to reduce emissions very smart move, just charge and drive, that is the logic I see rich people do they search for a problem and the solving the problem comes with a lot of money, there are still a lot of problems out there that needs a solution, look at the cell phone today it has reduced sending of letters and has made communication easy, we are benefiting from peoples solving a problem, surviving these days is not easy, but we just have to keep supporting one another.

That's true and they keep on coming. But those that are already on the top of the chain, they've got more opportunities and easier now to introduce any product or invention they create and that's how it's easy for them to solve more problems. While we don't like Elon pertaining to the crypto related matters but, can't deny that he's done a lot not just for his employees but also for the world. I just hope that he's really caring for it and profit is just the 2nd matter.

[MFahad]

Those problems which can be solved with money can be solved but there are lots of problems which are unable to solved even with huge money in hands. There are problems in life of everyone no matter he is rich or poor but problems comes.

In my opinion with wealthy people there are always a problem of health which cannot be always solved with money but in a case of poor people they have one most common problem which is money so most of their problems can be solved with the help of money.

I think solving a problem of rich people is more difficult as Compared to poor people because even with lots of money the wealthy people cannot solved their problems and it is reality that as more money comes more problems arises therefore poor people will be more satisfied than rich one

[JunaidAzizi]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Both Rich and poor people have problems and ethically we need to solve them for both but if I have to choose one I will solve the problem of poor people. There is reason behind it. If a rich person has a problem then he has at least the resources to fix it like the use of money, its references and its power, etc. But on the other side, If a poor person has a problem he does not have enough resources to solve it and in my view, this is the need of humanity to help the poor. The poor people have not only food and shelter issues but have some serious problems that are directly related to society. The poor people have many issues like divorce and family conflict, They have many health issues and their children grew up in poverty and are not educated which may lead to street crimes. These are some problems that make society awful that directly affect the rich person also. No doubt problems are a problem and no matter who has it whether it's a rich person or poor but poor people need it more

[Lida93]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Solving the problem of the rich individual means you'll get profits quickly as the rich will be willing to pay big for their problem to be solevd. One problem of the rich is security because they alway feel insecure therefore if you start up a personal security agency you can charge them big. The poor individuals mightn't have big money to pay you but you can use the advantage of their numbers therefore if you get millions of poor people to use the service you're offering, you'll get rich.

A greater number of people are more likely to solve the  problem of the rich compared to those ready and willing to solve the problems of the poor. Thy are solving the problem of the rich because of the reward that comes with it, the motive of the help is reward believing that the reward can come in form of money, promotion, favour etc.

But there's much of an economic benefits to the state when an individual direct his services to helping the poor. It reduces the financial burden of social welfare on government in catering for those poor and less privileged when private individuals intervenes in giving them help by solving a few of their needs.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

Maybe we should say it this way that both the rich and the poor do have problems, when the rich gets a problem, they have higher chances of getting it solved because they have money to an extent to push the problem to being solved, while when the poor has a problem, they lack money as a financial aid to get most of their challenges solved, which means it's better to use the opportunity in solving what money can first solve with the poor ones then the rich get other priority.

[Cling18]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Solving the problem of the rich individual means you'll get profits quickly as the rich will be willing to pay big for their problem to be solevd. One problem of the rich is security because they alway feel insecure therefore if you start up a personal security agency you can charge them big. The poor individuals mightn't have big money to pay you but you can use the advantage of their numbers therefore if you get millions of poor people to use the service you're offering, you'll get rich.

A greater number of people are more likely to solve the  problem of the rich compared to those ready and willing to solve the problems of the poor. Thy are solving the problem of the rich because of the reward that comes with it, the motive of the help is reward believing that the reward can come in form of money, promotion, favour etc.

But there's much of an economic benefits to the state when an individual direct his services to helping the poor. It reduces the financial burden of social welfare on government in catering for those poor and less privileged when private individuals intervenes in giving them help by solving a few of their needs.

To be honest, I genuinely feel happy solving or even helping solve the problem of the poor than rich people. Rich people have their funds, resources and assets to solve any issues and hardships. They could pay for people to fix their problems while poor people mostly rely on the government and people who are able to lend them a hand. Poor people need help but the government only provide a temporary assistance. They deserve a long term help to survive and live life not just a temporary food on the table.
Both need help but rich people are more able to solve their without getting help from anyone.

[South Park]

The rich have become rich because most of them are problem solvers. While being rich, the next level of having problems is likely about the management of their wealth which is easy IMHO.
While the poor, there are tons of problems that people are dealing with every day. It looks easy but it's not when the ratio of rich and poor isn't par at all.
We admit it or not, there are poorer than rich people, and problems that are being dealt with by most of them can't be tackled easily. Putting this on a serious note, I've been there and still trying to survive. Before helping the poor, I want to help myself first.

Another problem with that kind of question is that it makes it seem as if people can just decide to solve those problems and then it will simply happen, there are very powerful reasons why we have been unable to solve the problem of poverty all around the world and at all points in history, this tell us this problem is not one that can be solved by a single person and the will to do it, as it is a very complex problem and its magnitude also makes it almost impossible to dive into it with any confidence.

[Unbunplease]

The poor often have a chance to become rich and the rich often have a chance to become poor. The poor evoke feelings of compassion and the rich evoke feelings of envy and contempt. So - if you consider the issues of karma - the rich have more problems because many people curse them. And it is very difficult, being rich, to remain a man with a capital letter. A poor man has more chance of becoming rich than a rich man who has become poor

[Majestic-milf]

 It's quite easy to solve the problem of the poor than the rich. At least when you create jobs or provide a means of putting food on their table, paying bills and being somewhat independent, you have helped greatly in affecting their lives. But for the rich? You'd have to take care of so many things; and where will you want to start from?
Even though the poor can help solve some of the problems of the rich  in some areas like; Cook, chauffeur,gardener and the so many services they can render, there's still a yawning gap between them.
 

[dunfida]

The rich have become rich because most of them are problem solvers. While being rich, the next level of having problems is likely about the management of their wealth which is easy IMHO.
While the poor, there are tons of problems that people are dealing with every day. It looks easy but it's not when the ratio of rich and poor isn't par at all.
We admit it or not, there are poorer than rich people, and problems that are being dealt with by most of them can't be tackled easily. Putting this on a serious note, I've been there and still trying to survive. Before helping the poor, I want to help myself first.

Totally easy specially if you do have the money which you could really be able to move on and do all sorts of things which we do know that in every step we do make it does really involved money and solving out issues or
problems with those rich people then it would be definitely be pertaining into those wealth handling or business problems which it would really be that not as heavy with  those poor peoples problems on which it would really be pertaining about on how make themselves rich and this would be particularly finding ways on how to make themselves to be one and this would really be a challenged if you are really that offering the service.
Well when it comes on being ethical then people might be sticking into that poor problems which they would really be tending to help out to those who are really that in need but for sure this wont really be an
easy thing to deal with.

[Raflesia]

It's quite easy to solve the problem of the poor than the rich. At least when you create jobs or provide a means of putting food on their table, paying bills and being somewhat independent, you have helped greatly in affecting their lives. But for the rich? You'd have to take care of so many things; and where will you want to start from?
Even though the poor can help solve some of the problems of the rich  in some areas like; Cook, chauffeur,gardener and the so many services they can render, there's still a yawning gap between them.
 

But this condition will not be easy to realise.
The current condition is too troubled by various kinds of doubts about the poor because maybe this kind of thing is not found in other countries but in the country where I live, jobs are also seen from qualifications and strata whether they are in the caste of rich, middle or poor people by measuring the standard of education and experience they have.

Most poor people will most likely only be able to work in jobs that are not even that decent in terms of salary because of the qualification issue itself which makes it like a differentiator where rich people who already have a plus in terms of education will get a more decent job than poor people who sometimes won't even get the same opportunity because they are not sure whether they are capable or not because they don't qualify.

[Lida93]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Solving the problem of the rich individual means you'll get profits quickly as the rich will be willing to pay big for their problem to be solevd. One problem of the rich is security because they alway feel insecure therefore if you start up a personal security agency you can charge them big. The poor individuals mightn't have big money to pay you but you can use the advantage of their numbers therefore if you get millions of poor people to use the service you're offering, you'll get rich.

A greater number of people are more likely to solve the  problem of the rich compared to those ready and willing to solve the problems of the poor. Thy are solving the problem of the rich because of the reward that comes with it, the motive of the help is reward believing that the reward can come in form of money, promotion, favour etc.

But there's much of an economic benefits to the state when an individual direct his services to helping the poor. It reduces the financial burden of social welfare on government in catering for those poor and less privileged when private individuals intervenes in giving them help by solving a few of their needs.

To be honest, I genuinely feel happy solving or even helping solve the problem of the poor than rich people. Rich people have their funds, resources and assets to solve any issues and hardships. They could pay for people to fix their problems while poor people mostly rely on the government and people who are able to lend them a hand. Poor people need help but the government only provide a temporary assistance. They deserve a long term help to survive and live life not just a temporary food on the table.
Both need help but rich people are more able to solve their without getting help from anyone.

The underlying aspect of this is that the rich has a multi choice from where to source for solutions to his problem using his money but the poor is with no choice from where his solution can come from and that's what makes it of a necessity to give help more to the poor when we are faced with the opportunity. The rich can help themself but the poor can because he doesn't have the wherewithall to do so.
Sarcastically speaking, the funny thing is that the problem of the poor is not always a big problem to solve , very minimal that with little funds solution will be made available unlike to the rich (big-man big-problem) their problems are not usually money related problems, and that's what makes the solutions to most of their problems difficult to meet.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

The word "Problem" is broad and can mean different thing to different persons at a given period, just as it could mean financial for those in needs, health challenge for the sick and emotional needs for those in need of advice. But on the contrary, if i'm to be in such a position to help, i will go for the poor, simply because they have no one to help them, and by doing so will really mean alot to the poor.

[Cookdata]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

If life was to be fair to people and I have a way to turn things around, I will make sure individual never suffer to make a living, my decision and willingness to help will not stop the riches from amassing their wealth but I will make sure the poor breathe and have access to good health, well fed with good food and basic amenities, this will be  a standard practice for the world until we have a new place called another world but I will make sure the world eradicate poverty free where poverty will be a discussion of the past like the way we had slavery in the 70s and 80s.

I will also change the financial system of the government, that thing is not working, only favour the people around in power and such financial system is nothing but garbage, the inflation they created is killing an average person with low purchasing power of their fiats., I will kill that idea and make sure to have a standard currency that will be generally accept as world reserve currency, this is going to be my change to the world if and if the opportunity is available.

[Mahanton]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Solving the problem of the rich individual means you'll get profits quickly as the rich will be willing to pay big for their problem to be solevd. One problem of the rich is security because they alway feel insecure therefore if you start up a personal security agency you can charge them big. The poor individuals mightn't have big money to pay you but you can use the advantage of their numbers therefore if you get millions of poor people to use the service you're offering, you'll get rich.

A greater number of people are more likely to solve the  problem of the rich compared to those ready and willing to solve the problems of the poor. Thy are solving the problem of the rich because of the reward that comes with it, the motive of the help is reward believing that the reward can come in form of money, promotion, favour etc.

But there's much of an economic benefits to the state when an individual direct his services to helping the poor. It reduces the financial burden of social welfare on government in catering for those poor and less privileged when private individuals intervenes in giving them help by solving a few of their needs.

To be honest, I genuinely feel happy solving or even helping solve the problem of the poor than rich people. Rich people have their funds, resources and assets to solve any issues and hardships. They could pay for people to fix their problems while poor people mostly rely on the government and people who are able to lend them a hand. Poor people need help but the government only provide a temporary assistance. They deserve a long term help to survive and live life not just a temporary food on the table.
Both need help but rich people are more able to solve their without getting help from anyone.

The underlying aspect of this is that the rich has a multi choice from where to source for solutions to his problem using his money but the poor is with no choice from where his solution can come from and that's what makes it of a necessity to give help more to the poor when we are faced with the opportunity. The rich can help themself but the poor can because he doesn't have the wherewithall to do so.
Sarcastically speaking, the funny thing is that the problem of the poor is not always a big problem to solve , very minimal that with little funds solution will be made available unlike to the rich (big-man big-problem) their problems are not usually money related problems, and that's what makes the solutions to most of their problems difficult to meet.

What are those common rich people problem which it isnt including about money? Knowing that they would be mainly be thinking or getting involved with business related problems.
Are you pertaining about lovelife? health? relationship problems? Cant able to have a child?. These are personal things but we know that everything in life cant really be balance. Yes, you do have the money but you cant
have everything but the good thing on being rich is that you are really that able to solve out problems as long you do have the money since there's something you could really be able to make use of. Unlike when you are poor then the first priority you do have in mind is on how to make your life way more better in terms of money and finances. Therefore, if i were to choose on which one i would really be taking into in speaking about
problems in between then i would go for the poor ones, usually this would be speaking about changing their lives in terms of finances and those kind of development which it isnt really just that much hard
and would really be happy on helping someone on whose really in need or some sort of help i would say.

[Bushdark]

Solving the problem of the poor should be a good decision than trying to solve the problem of some rich people who already have money.
The poor are the people that keep suffering from a harsh government policies and the rich has nothing to do lose since they have businesses that keep giving them money employing people to work for them to earn more profits. The poor need aids to live a better lifestyle than depending on the wrong sources for money or jobs that will not help them to be financially stable.

[lousie9]

The word "Problem" is broad and can mean different thing to different persons at a given period, just as it could mean financial for those in needs, health challenge for the sick and emotional needs for those in need of advice. But on the contrary, if i'm to be in such a position to help, i will go for the poor, simply because they have no one to help them, and by doing so will really mean alot to the poor.

Yes, you are absolutely right, I also feel that the context of the sentence "problem" is still too general and does not have a specific purpose or a specific meaning. In fact, both rich people and poor people of course still need someone's help. But I think the percentage level of poor people is certainly far more in need of help than rich people because of their "powerlessness".
Rich people certainly have the perception that it will be more effective and efficient to use the services of experts to solve a problem they are facing, in contrast to the poor who do not have the capacity to use the services of experts to deal with the problems they are experiencing.
In my opinion, helping the poor people may indeed feel more meaningful when it comes to their "powerlessness" problem. But it won't be easy and probably won't fully help them completely if we also don't have the capacity to help them with their "problems".

[dothebeats]

Solving the problem of the poor should be a good decision than trying to solve the problem of some rich people who already have money.
The poor are the people that keep suffering from a harsh government policies and the rich has nothing to do lose since they have businesses that keep giving them money employing people to work for them to earn more profits. The poor need aids to live a better lifestyle than depending on the wrong sources for money or jobs that will not help them to be financially stable.

Playing the devil's advocate, what if solving the problem of the rich benefits the poor? As the problem is not specified and explained by OP, let's assume that it is a big financial problem. More often than not, financial problems of the rich lead to companies closing which then leads to workers losing their jobs, creating bigger problems for the poor. Hence, solving this specific problem of the rich helps and maintain a good place for the poor.

[Bloodseekers]

Solving the problem of the poor should be a good decision than trying to solve the problem of some rich people who already have money.
The poor are the people that keep suffering from a harsh government policies and the rich has nothing to do lose since they have businesses that keep giving them money employing people to work for them to earn more profits. The poor need aids to live a better lifestyle than depending on the wrong sources for money or jobs that will not help them to be financially stable.

Yes, I totally agree with you if you choose to help solve the problems of the poor. It's true that very few people will help him if it's the poor who get the problem, of course people will let it go, as you said the poor continue to suffer with government policies and that's true. I see that most poor people find it difficult to make money so they can't fulfill a decent life for them, very different from the rich who can easily run their business and there are some entrepreneurs who do not pay taxes so they can reduce state revenues.

[blockman]

The rich have become rich because most of them are problem solvers. While being rich, the next level of having problems is likely about the management of their wealth which is easy IMHO.
While the poor, there are tons of problems that people are dealing with every day. It looks easy but it's not when the ratio of rich and poor isn't par at all.
We admit it or not, there are poorer than rich people, and problems that are being dealt with by most of them can't be tackled easily. Putting this on a serious note, I've been there and still trying to survive. Before helping the poor, I want to help myself first.

Another problem with that kind of question is that it makes it seem as if people can just decide to solve those problems and then it will simply happen, there are very powerful reasons why we have been unable to solve the problem of poverty all around the world and at all points in history, this tell us this problem is not one that can be solved by a single person and the will to do it, as it is a very complex problem and its magnitude also makes it almost impossible to dive into it with any confidence.

Yeah, very complex reason. And I think that even with these billionaires or trillionaires able to solve the world's hunger and poverty, it just can't happen. While there are people who deals with poverty, there's also the money that flows within remaining on this problem and that's why they're stopping any possible solution that's being brought to raise awareness or deal with poverty or any problem that results with that. It's hard to make a solution when you're not committed on it and if you are but the major motivator is money.

[Sim_card]

Personally, solving the problem of the poor will be the best because they will never look down on you and they will bless and pray for you. The rich feels that the moment you have been paid for a service rendered to them, they owe you nothing and that is the end. A poor man will never forget and if he can sing your praises. A poor man needs more attention than a rich man because they are vulnerable, unlike the rich man that can get alternatives.

[Xcode7]

Personally, solving the problem of the poor will be the best because they will never look down on you and they will bless and pray for you. The rich feels that the moment you have been paid for a service rendered to them, they owe you nothing and that is the end. A poor man will never forget and if he can sing your praises. A poor man needs more attention than a rich man because they are vulnerable, unlike the rich man that can get alternatives.

Not all of them are like that, that is included in the personal person who gives gratitude, but indeed most of the poor and rich people have a different mindset about this, but I can only emphasize that it does not include everything.
But the logical reason when we choose to help the poor is their limitations which are different from the rich, people can do it and there will even be many people who will solve their problems whether it's with the money they have or not, while the poor don't have that power.

Yeah, very complex reason. And I think that even with these billionaires or trillionaires able to solve the world's hunger and poverty, it just can't happen. While there are people who deals with poverty, there's also the money that flows within remaining on this problem and that's why they're stopping any possible solution that's being brought to raise awareness or deal with poverty or any problem that results with that. It's hard to make a solution when you're not committed on it and if you are but the major motivator is money.

What is happening in the world right now is like that, no matter how much people have money they will still look for it again for more, between greed and fear of running out, it all goes back to today's humans who never feel enough so don't expect them to let wealth possessed to overcome this, there are actually some of them that are the cause of poverty.

[tjtonmoy]

I choose "solve the problem of the poor". Most likely, the problem of the poor is hunger. If you get feed 3 times a day 365 for the rest of your life, then all you can focus on is your dream. Let's just say, no matter what, you will get food. Doesn't matter if you work or not! If that's the case, then other problems could be solved easily because you can focus on them better. And when those are solved, you can focus on dreams. And that's the definition of happiness. Isn't it?

And if that happens, maybe poor people can become rich or successful. Well, being rich or successful doesn't matter when you are happy. Learning to be happy with what you have is the best way to live. Not having problems being poor is going to be the best.

[blockman]

Yeah, very complex reason. And I think that even with these billionaires or trillionaires able to solve the world's hunger and poverty, it just can't happen. While there are people who deals with poverty, there's also the money that flows within remaining on this problem and that's why they're stopping any possible solution that's being brought to raise awareness or deal with poverty or any problem that results with that. It's hard to make a solution when you're not committed on it and if you are but the major motivator is money.

What is happening in the world right now is like that, no matter how much people have money they will still look for it again for more, between greed and fear of running out, it all goes back to today's humans who never feel enough so don't expect them to let wealth possessed to overcome this,

That's human nature, the rich become richer while the mindset of the people who are poor is stuck until they realize that it won't move their lives if they don't do something.

there are actually some of them that are the cause of poverty.

I agree that there are some of them that do things that make the people can't go out of poverty. Even in our country, there are oligarchs that have solved problems but then, they're also the reason why many can't get out of poverty.

Well, being rich or successful doesn't matter when you are happy. Learning to be happy with what you have is the best way to live. Not having problems being poor is going to be the best.

While I do agree with what you've said, it's just we have to choose on which things we'll be happy. Poor or rich, we've got our own definition and ways of being happy. But I'd rather be the person who's happy but not problematic financially.

[Obari]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Well solving a problem in this case depends on the scenario and relevance  and urgency of the problem but whatever the case might be, most times everyone will  want to solve the problem of the rich because they have a believe that, there might be some sort of rewards attached to it and there are always someone to reward and recognize  their efforts but reverse is the case with helping a poor person because in most cases it always believed that is an effort without any reward and I've seen videos mostly on Facebook  where people give out relief materials to people in either cash or other forms on camera and you should know that those kind of giving also have their intentions.

[Sexylizzy2813]

For me I'll choose to solve the problems of the poor than the rich because to me I don't see the problems of the rich as something to worry about, they (the rich) do know how to get in and out of their problems but the poor don't.
By solving the problems of the poor, I can gain more by doing so, imagine I help out the poor, by giving them shelter food clothes and everything they need to stay alive and comfortable, I can as well employ them to work for me in return as a businessman, with that alone I think I have solved their problems and also gain more because the more man power I get to expand my business the more money I get to cover for what I spent on them, is a 50/50 thing.

[G_Besar]

Personally, solving the problem of the poor will be the best because they will never look down on you and they will bless and pray for you. The rich feels that the moment you have been paid for a service rendered to them, they owe you nothing and that is the end. A poor man will never forget and if he can sing your praises. A poor man needs more attention than a rich man because they are vulnerable, unlike the rich man that can get alternatives.

Rich people are not people who expect attention or pity from other people who are not richer than them or other people who are in the same caste position as them. So the two are not the same nor is it worth comparing, because in general everyone who gets help from other people in any case will always want to praise the person who helped him.

And that's regardless of whether the person is rich or not, because the person who gets the assistance will also not immediately see the person helping him in terms of the wealth owned by that person. So this also depends on the intention of the person who wants to provide assistance to those who need it and that person will also not wait for himself to be rich first so that he can help other people who are experiencing difficulties, such as the example of the poor.

[goldkingcoiner]

Solving the problem of one rich person can save thousands of jobs so it depends on who is that rich person and what is their problem.

If you see more replies that say to solve the problems of more poor people then its not a wonder because that is the right thing from an ethical Point of View.

I do not think it is wise to assume that by solving a rich persons problem, that this will automatically transfer to the problem solving of the poor people. In most cases, it will make the rich person richer, while the poor stay poor. The rich have no qualms about exploiting the poor, even when it is  completely unnecessary. All they care about are their own egos and money. Look at Elon Musk. What exactly has he done to further humanity? Only empty promises and ego-stroking on social media.

[uchegod-21]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

I would like to solve the problem of the rich rather than that of the poor. A rich man problem will be specific and once that problem is solved you will be paid for it and that ends it. But a poor man's problem might not be one, as you are solving one, another problem is evolving.

Even after solving the problem of the rich, if there is a fault anywhere, the rich will not panic, they will talk calmly about it. I am speaking from the experience of rendering services. I have rendered services to both the rich and the poor. After fixing a particular thing for the poor, and there is slight fault or error they will panic as if their money is gone or as if the world is ending that day  the rich whose problem is very limited does not stress the problem solver.

[michellee]

Personally, solving the problem of the poor will be the best because they will never look down on you and they will bless and pray for you. The rich feels that the moment you have been paid for a service rendered to them, they owe you nothing and that is the end. A poor man will never forget and if he can sing your praises. A poor man needs more attention than a rich man because they are vulnerable, unlike the rich man that can get alternatives.

That will be the duty of the government but the rich people can also contribute to helping the poor. Maybe the rich people can help by giving them a job in one of their offices so that the poor people can earn money from their work. But it takes effort to get a job from a rich person because many people want to try it.

Assistance from the government can be in the form of jobs, social services, or something else that can help the poor people to survive. If their basic needs have been met, the poor people will try to make money by looking for work so they are no longer dependent on anyone. Poor people also want to be independent but unfortunately, they don't get the opportunity to do so.

And I agree with you that poor people need more attention than rich people because there are limitations to doing things like others. But poor people still don't give up on their situation and will keep fighting until they can succeed like other people.

[Bebe22]

Solving the problem of one rich person can save thousands of jobs so it depends on who is that rich person and what is their problem.

If you see more replies that say to solve the problems of more poor people then its not a wonder because that is the right thing from an ethical Point of View.

Yes OG , it depends on who is that rich person and what their problem is. Rich people are already problem solvers, so helping a problem solver solve his problem would help him solve others problems more effectively. That's also going to make me an indirect problem solver hitting 2 birds with one stone.  
Now the thing is the explanation above is ethical only when the problem I'm actually solving is one that isn't of the self interest of the rich person, cause then I would just be making the rich richer...
 

[Razmirraz]

Poor people only have the will to work and the energy used to work, whereas the rich have the money to pay all the workers. Solving the problems of the poor has no continuity with other parties, they do not have the ability financially to solve the problems of the people around them.

I prefer to solve the problems of the rich because they have the facilities to develop and can solve the problems of the poor. In general what we often encounter in everyday life rich people always provide services to poor people to make a living. So solving the problems of the rich is more effective than solving the problems of the poor because the rich can provide employment facilities to the poor, while the poor cannot afford to employ the rich.

[m2017]

A strange dilemma at first glance, but the choice is quite obvious when viewed from a pragmatic point of view. Any reasonable person will not choose between the problem of the rich or the problem of the poor, but will render his services to the side that pays more. Your wording was:

This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living.

If the goal is to earn a living, then the specific choice will depend on the solvency of a few rich people and a lot of poor people.

[kryptqnick]

I'm happy to see I'm with the majority here. Of course, rich problems have their problems, some of them quite serious and unlike the things poor people face. But rich people also have financial resources, which in our capitalist world means that they can use the money to solve whichever problems they have by buying things or services. The poor, however, often have problems that are hard to solve without resources, and they lack resources. I also don't think that poverty is fair overall, so I believe we should strive towards making it a problem of the past. So I'd help poor people because that can drastically change lives of some people in a way that wouldn't otherwise be accessible to them.

[Lorence.xD]

I'm happy to see I'm with the majority here. Of course, rich problems have their problems, some of them quite serious and unlike the things poor people face. But rich people also have financial resources, which in our capitalist world means that they can use the money to solve whichever problems they have by buying things or services. The poor, however, often have problems that are hard to solve without resources, and they lack resources. I also don't think that poverty is fair overall, so I believe we should strive towards making it a problem of the past. So I'd help poor people because that can drastically change lives of some people in a way that wouldn't otherwise be accessible to them.

I know right? It's impossible for them to be called "rich" without the resources and connections that could solve their problems. Plus they have the knowledge that could solve their problem cause let's be honest most of the poor doesn't have the priviledge to study and learn due to they lack money so they don't have any idea for example in managing their financial problems. Cause if we would think of it, due to knowledge of some people who has the power are being used to take advantage on lower people by just simply being corrupt. And also poverty is most common problem of the economy worldwide, if we people have a lot of resources to provide for the rich how about the poor right? I just hate it when people thinks "if you born poor, you'll die poor" just help them bro, educate them where they could just change their life.

[savetheFORUM]

What problems do rich people have that they can't solve with money? Love? Can't decide which car to buy, and the garage only fits 12? How to avoid paying that 0.1% in taxes?

Well, a problem is always a problem, so when a rich person has a lot of money and he wants that to become less, you can take some of his money and give it to some poor people, here you will be solving two problems while actually solving one problem.  However, the rich usually don't have the problem of having a lot of money because the more they get the more they want, and they would never allow someone to give away their money to the poor at all.

Anyway, getting back to OP, I would definitely go with solving the problems of a lot of poor because I believe a rich doesn't really have problems as severe as the poor since they have a lot of money and there is barely a problem that money can't solve in today's world, so they can still manage somehow.

[GiftedMAN]

I will go with solving the problem of the poor: Regardless of how the society has changed the mindset of people in which they no longer remember where they are coming from, I think a poor man will always be grateful seeing that some one has solved a problem for him be it financial problems or material problems the poor man will appreciate it more but helping a rich man who has touched money for me I think they can't be grateful enough because they will always feel that since they have made money they can get anyone around to help them knowing that they can influence them with money or power. Secondly, solving the problem of one poor man you have helped to reduce the number of crimes by 1% in the society because most crimes are caused by poor people who are not employed so helping just one man can reduce the crime rate which the rich man can not commit because of their reputations.

[bayu7adi]

I think solving a problem of rich people is more difficult as Compared to poor people because even with lots of money the wealthy people cannot solved their problems and it is reality that as more money comes more problems arises therefore poor people will be more satisfied than rich one

In reality, resolving the issues of the wealthy isn't all that challenging. Even when it comes to health problems, every individual shares the same health concerns, as we're all human. What complicates solving the problems of the affluent is the emergence of our business orientations. Yet, the real complexity arises from our business mindset. The playing field in the business realm among the wealthy is a fierce one; numerous individuals vie for easy gains from the affluent.

Insurance companies are even willing to incur hefty marketing costs to capture the attention of the affluent. The competition in the realms of insurance, finance, and healthcare is notably intense. This stems from the fact that the market of the affluent is both dense and fiercely competitive. Consequently, it becomes a challenge for ordinary individuals to emerge victorious in this contest.

[Rockstarguy]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

I think the problem of the rich could be getting more money which can never be as critical like that  of the poor. The poor have lot of problems that needs to be solved with money,  solving the problem of the poor for them to become financially okay is the most important to me. Taking people out from poverty brings peace and put to the end of illegal activities in an area, I think poverty is a virus that can be passed from parents to children,  if one is elevated from poverty it is not just beneficial to one person but different people.

[famososMuertos]

Well... if I solve my problems I help the rich and the poor. Anyway, each to their own, I just saw a comment from a billionaire who said that if the rich cared more about the effectiveness of their money, many problems that affect less favored people would be solved.

But on the other side, the poor, if they do not care about resolving their issues, are not going to get solutions,  who has money to help does not mean that they will get you out of the economic hole where you are, anyway! in both cases as I said it, take care of yours business, then, correctly that helps the collective without distinction of social class.

[Bushdark]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

I think the problem of the rich could be getting more money which can never be as critical like that  of the poor. The poor have lot of problems that needs to be solved with money,  solving the problem of the poor for them to become financially okay is the most important to me. Taking people out from poverty brings peace and put to the end of illegal activities in an area, I think poverty is a virus that can be passed from parents to children,  if one is elevated from poverty it is not just beneficial to one person but different people.

The rich don't even have a problem but the poor have more problem that we can imagine. Those that are rich are making more money everytime and there problem is to make more money while the poor are left aside to perish if they don't have money to pay for bulls and live a better lifestyle. I don't even think the rich have problem except making more money adding it to there portfolio to become richer with competition. I will rather solve the problem of a poor man than trying to satisfy the rich to make few make more money.

[alastantiger]

Meta spent $43 million on Mark Zuckerberg's personal security in the past three years. This includes the cost of bodyguards, security cameras, and other security measures, according to a report by The New York Post.

I will choose to solve the problem of the rich. I will develop modern security systems for the rich. I see that they spend so much money their security in a year. Even if I can, I would create a drone that go with them wherever go. Another problem which the rich have is that they do not know how to spend their money. Most spend it on materialist stuff that do not give them happiness. Most of them are looking for happiness and this is one of the problems of the rich too that I would solve using tech and a holistic human-centered approach.

[Smartvirus]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Well, when you think about the poor and the means by which you could aid them, your moved by compassion to make this choices but, in the course of making a survival as well and not get to hurt anyone by doing something illegal, I’ll probably pick the poor still.
Yeah, the rich might yield me some quick cash, probably stress me less but then,
In helping the poor, you gain more than the money you would generate from the service but, respect and never forget that some of those guys might turn out to be rich in future. Some of those we call rich today actually walked their way up the stairs from little and bottom beginnings.

Life isn’t all about profit, not saying you shouldn’t get what you could get but in the bid that you could get satisfaction and continuity from helping those with less, you would be great with your life as well. Humanity needs to be a part of your approach towards duty.

[dansus021]

Im poor now and I do have a bunch of problems hahaha and one of many is financial, however I vote to fix the rich for fun  I mean what is the problem of the rich people if they are rich and can buy anything they can actually help the poor and the cycle keep goes on and on but one thing for sure there will be always the rich and poor in anywhere it is unstoppable basically this is the life is :')

[xSkylarx]

Meta spent $43 million on Mark Zuckerberg's personal security in the past three years. This includes the cost of bodyguards, security cameras, and other security measures, according to a report by The New York Post.

I will choose to solve the problem of the rich. I will develop modern security systems for the rich. I see that they spend so much money their security in a year. Even if I can, I would create a drone that go with them wherever go. Another problem which the rich have is that they do not know how to spend their money. Most spend it on materialist stuff that do not give them happiness. Most of them are looking for happiness and this is one of the problems of the rich too that I would solve using tech and a holistic human-centered approach.

That is really innovative imagination, which is probably happening soon, but to conclude, some rich people or most of the rich people want a really comfortable life. What I mean is that if they can automate opening the door for them, they will do it because of the comfort; it is not lazy; it is just saving time. Like you said, if they can save time in traveling, then for sure they will buy it. That is what most of those rich people want; they don't think about how expensive it is as long as it benefits them.

[lienfaye]

I will choose to solve the problem of rich people. Because they're only few, saves my time while generating more profit. Sometimes it's wise to choose what's more beneficial because of this, let's say these rich people are businessmen owning businesses/companies that hired poor people. If they have problem and unable to attend to their position, this can affect their business since the boss is not doing fine. It can result to closing their companies (worse case) and those people under this company (the poor) will lost their job.

On the other side, the usual problem of poor is money, food on the table and job. Rich people are the ones who can provide job for the poor, so by helping the rich, you also help the poor, though not directly.

[Wimex]

It is a question of morality and also a dilemma in many aspects, however, leaving aside one's own interests.. I think that if given the possibility it would help to solve the problems of a poor person because it is highly probable that the rich have a large portfolio of solutions available to you and if not; a whole team, contacts, experience or a portfolio predisposed to help you. to deal with your complications on the other hand the poor person in question will have little projection and in terms of whether someone can be helped I think that for many reasons it is more useful and It would make me feel better as a person to help someone who really needs it.

[reagansimms]

Rich people and poor people have different problems, the main problem that is most commonly faced by poor people is finance, they work to support their families so they can eat three times a day. Poor people only think about their fate and that of their families so they can eat and sleep well. While the rich have broader problems that have a relationship with the poor in terms of salary payment problems. The rich also don't only think about their fate, but there are tens or hundreds of poor people's fate that they have to think about if their business is not running effectively.

I will choose to solve the problems of the rich, not because I don't care about the fate of the poor, but when the problems of the rich are resolved, indirectly the problems of the poor are also solved.

[Minecache]

Rich people and poor people have different problems, the main problem that is most commonly faced by poor people is finance, they work to support their families so they can eat three times a day. Poor people only think about their fate and that of their families so they can eat and sleep well. While the rich have broader problems that have a relationship with the poor in terms of salary payment problems. The rich also don't only think about their fate, but there are tens or hundreds of poor people's fate that they have to think about if their business is not running effectively.

I will choose to solve the problems of the rich, not because I don't care about the fate of the poor, but when the problems of the rich are resolved, indirectly the problems of the poor are also solved.

You have an interesting perspective on the problem of the rich and the poor. It can be said that the problem of the poor completely depends on the rich, so as long as the rich can solve their problems, the poor will also partly solve their problems. Like what happens in times of crisis when companies and businesses file for bankruptcy, leading to widespread unemployment and it's a poor man's problem. And to solve this problem, we need new businesses, startups, and that's a problem that needs to be solved by the rich.

[bitgolden]

Yeah, very complex reason. And I think that even with these billionaires or trillionaires able to solve the world's hunger and poverty, it just can't happen. While there are people who deals with poverty, there's also the money that flows within remaining on this problem and that's why they're stopping any possible solution that's being brought to raise awareness or deal with poverty or any problem that results with that. It's hard to make a solution when you're not committed on it and if you are but the major motivator is money.

What is happening in the world right now is like that, no matter how much people have money they will still look for it again for more, between greed and fear of running out, it all goes back to today's humans who never feel enough so don't expect them to let wealth possessed to overcome this, there are actually some of them that are the cause of poverty.

Fear of running out could make sense until like a few million dollars, but when you have over a billion dollars there is no fear of running it, it doesn't make sense at all. You are doing something that doesn't make sense and you should be able to avoid that fear, you are a billionaire, how could you end up running out of money when you have that much money.

You should be able to do something much better and easier and could end up making a good profit when the time comes. I hope that it gets to a point where you could end up living in a situation where it doesn't take that much time for you, and you could end up with a greater return with that kind of money. When you are already rich, it's the greed that drives people.

[dothebeats]

Rich people and poor people have different problems, the main problem that is most commonly faced by poor people is finance, they work to support their families so they can eat three times a day. Poor people only think about their fate and that of their families so they can eat and sleep well. While the rich have broader problems that have a relationship with the poor in terms of salary payment problems. The rich also don't only think about their fate, but there are tens or hundreds of poor people's fate that they have to think about if their business is not running effectively.

I will choose to solve the problems of the rich, not because I don't care about the fate of the poor, but when the problems of the rich are resolved, indirectly the problems of the poor are also solved.

You have an interesting perspective on the problem of the rich and the poor. It can be said that the problem of the poor completely depends on the rich, so as long as the rich can solve their problems, the poor will also partly solve their problems. Like what happens in times of crisis when companies and businesses file for bankruptcy, leading to widespread unemployment and it's a poor man's problem. And to solve this problem, we need new businesses, startups, and that's a problem that needs to be solved by the rich.

I completely agree with you. This is what I mean by stating that solving the problem of the rich helps on a bigger scale in a way that affects not only the rich but the poor as well. The rich have a higher influence and effect on the economy and other industries. Solving the problem of the poor, on the other hand, rarely affects the rich in any way. Hence, if given the chance, I'd rather solve the problem of the rich due to the effects it will cause for the majority.

[DanWalker]

I will choose to solve the problem of rich people. Because they're only few, saves my time while generating more profit. Sometimes it's wise to choose what's more beneficial because of this, let's say these rich people are businessmen owning businesses/companies that hired poor people. If they have problem and unable to attend to their position, this can affect their business since the boss is not doing fine. It can result to closing their companies (worse case) and those people under this company (the poor) will lost their job.

On the other side, the usual problem of poor is money, food on the table and job. Rich people are the ones who can provide job for the poor, so by helping the rich, you also help the poor, though not directly.

I agree with you and some of the comments here, we just need to solve the problem of the rich, then the problem of the poor will automatically be solved. The rich and the poor are interdependent, and neither would survive without supporting each other and our society would cease to exist. The role of both is very important, but the people who control this world are the rich, so if we want to solve the problem, we need to solve the problem of the rich.

[Baki202]

Rich and poor people have their own problems according to their own portions. If they choose me to hear their problems, of course I welcome. But won't provide any solution if it doesn't suit my knowledge and experience preference. I just don't want to add more problems because of wrong advice, and I don't want to become another corner of the problem.

The rich always find a way of managing their problems and the poor are always dependent on the government in time of solving problems, That is what is affecting the majority of us in our society and it is fine that the government is supposed to stand for its people but even at that we should try to solve some little problem, it will still turn to a situation everyone will want to wait for the government,  any societal problem should be solved by the society, and the rich solve there own problem and also look for additional problems to solve which will bring them more money because in the process of solving problem brings money.

[posi]

Rich and poor people have their own problems according to their own portions. If they choose me to hear their problems, of course I welcome. But won't provide any solution if it doesn't suit my knowledge and experience preference. I just don't want to add more problems because of wrong advice, and I don't want to become another corner of the problem.

Even if it were to suit my knowledge and experience preference, I wouldn't dare to give advice to anyone. Because we are not in their position and we cannot know what they will gain or lose if they follow our advice. We are also not responsible for their lives so giving real advice should be considered. Honestly, even we ourselves have problems that we need to solve but we still can't solve them. So I will choose to refuse to give advice to someone.

[dezoel]

Poor people only have the will to work and the energy used to work, whereas the rich have the money to pay all the workers. Solving the problems of the poor has no continuity with other parties, they do not have the ability financially to solve the problems of the people around them.

I prefer to solve the problems of the rich because they have the facilities to develop and can solve the problems of the poor. In general what we often encounter in everyday life rich people always provide services to poor people to make a living. So solving the problems of the rich is more effective than solving the problems of the poor because the rich can provide employment facilities to the poor, while the poor cannot afford to employ the rich.

Well, it would basically depend on the problems of the rich and your problem-solving capability. If you are capable of solving the issues of a lot of poor by providing them jobs and food and shelter or whatever they need, you should probably go with that, but if your capability is to fix a problem of a few rich people which will further open doors for a lot of poor people getting jobs and an income, that is definitely the thing you should go with.

That's why I say that one needs to evaluate their own capabilities and problem-solving resources and then see the problems of both the rich and the poor and then decide which side they will choose, you can't just make up your mind and make a decision based on your own assumptions without any facts.

[irhact]

I will choose to solve the problems of the rich, not because I don't care about the fate of the poor, but when the problems of the rich are resolved, indirectly the problems of the poor are also solved.

I don't think this is true because I can name many problems of the rich that can get solved but that doesn't mean the problem of the poor is also solved. Rich individual travel with expensive means of transportation like airplane and if I was to launch a new airplane that make travelling private a lot easier for rich individuals and it makes me billions, that doesn't mean the problem of the poor individuals has been solved because they can't afford to fly private like the rich individuals.

The problems of the rich and poor are different, the poor individuals mostly care about problem of their needs but the rich problem are more than needs but extend to wants and that's because they have alot of money that they won't have issue taking care of their needs.

[naira]

This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

If I had a service like that, of course I would choose to solve the problems of the rich, the reason is that with their finances we can measure the problems they face and most importantly, of course, manage finances. In this case we have got one main supporting factor, namely money, that way the solution to the problem can be found more easily.

Conversely, if the service is to solve the poor condition of the community, there will definitely be many factors, namely money, jobs, and human resource needs. Now, interestingly, if we can solve the problems of the rich, it will automatically open up opportunities for the poor to get allocations such as jobs. As many people have said above solving one individual problem will open up 10 useful solutions for the public.

[Porfirii]

This is a typical black or white question. I guess that we can't be so exhaustive when we pose this kind of questions: it will depend in many factors like time, place, opportunity, who are the rich, who are the poor, consequences of activity and inactivity...

One could answer that, in general, problems of the rich/poor should be addressed first, but it would only serve to show the political ideology of each one (left/right; democrat/republican; socialist/liberal), because there is no universal rule for that question.

[Emmanuelex]

Maybe it depends on the specific service you're rendering? I'm a business person already, and from my experience I can tell you that having a few rich people as clients helps you go a long way in your business. Just one contract from a rich person is enough to put money in your pocket for a long time. So that's what I'm definitely choosing. Don't forget that how successful you are will usually depend on the circle of people you operate within.

[Mpamaegbu]

Whether rich or poor, a problem is a problem because the affected person doesn't know how or have a way out of it. I know we're dealing with a hypothetical situation here. However, if I were to make an intervention; I would look at the problems both are bringing to me and not their social status. This calls for a dispassionate approach. No doubt, looking at it from the prism of sentiment one is likely tempted to favour the poor. And rightly so too because the rich can always sought themselves out with their colleagues but the poor aren't lucky to have that kind of option. Putting the issue on a scale, devoid of prejudice, is the way I will go.

[kojektea]

more useful for solving problems than the poor. Why? because the rich cannot be helped financially, they are mostly stubborn and self-centered. when we say we give to the poor they will accept it with pleasure, it has solved the problem for those of us who have advantages, this is simple but not as difficult as we think.

[AnonBitCoiner]

You have an interesting perspective on the problem of the rich and the poor. It can be said that the problem of the poor completely depends on the rich, so as long as the rich can solve their problems, the poor will also partly solve their problems. Like what happens in times of crisis when companies and businesses file for bankruptcy, leading to widespread unemployment and it's a poor man's problem. And to solve this problem, we need new businesses, startups, and that's a problem that needs to be solved by the rich.

Businesses are run by rich people and those people who are not doing any job yet become a part of these jobs so this job related problem of poor people can be solved by rich people. We can say that rich people can manage the problems of poor people but we cannot say that it completely depends on rich people because there is just a difference of money between them whereas all humans are alike.

If a person wants to solve the problem by himself then he will not see towards his money but will try to resolve the issue No matter from where he takes the money for resolving his issue. Job related issues can be solved by rich people but other problems either can be solved by themselves or will never be resolved.

[radjie]

Rich people and poor people have different problems, the main problem that is most commonly faced by poor people is finance, they work to support their families so they can eat three times a day. Poor people only think about their fate and that of their families so they can eat and sleep well. While the rich have broader problems that have a relationship with the poor in terms of salary payment problems. The rich also don't only think about their fate, but there are tens or hundreds of poor people's fate that they have to think about if their business is not running effectively.

I will choose to solve the problems of the rich, not because I don't care about the fate of the poor, but when the problems of the rich are resolved, indirectly the problems of the poor are also solved.

You have an interesting perspective on the problem of the rich and the poor. It can be said that the problem of the poor completely depends on the rich, so as long as the rich can solve their problems, the poor will also partly solve their problems. Like what happens in times of crisis when companies and businesses file for bankruptcy, leading to widespread unemployment and it's a poor man's problem. And to solve this problem, we need new businesses, startups, and that's a problem that needs to be solved by the rich.

I completely agree with you. This is what I mean by stating that solving the problem of the rich helps on a bigger scale in a way that affects not only the rich but the poor as well. The rich have a higher influence and effect on the economy and other industries. Solving the problem of the poor, on the other hand, rarely affects the rich in any way. Hence, if given the chance, I'd rather solve the problem of the rich due to the effects it will cause for the majority.

This makes sense, but it all depends on how much the rich people are able to empower the lives of the poor, because some rich people are more concerned about developing their own business without looking at the situation of the people under them.
However, the problems of the rich and the poor will always coexist, at least people should also be able to solve the problems of the poor in order to get a better life

[Texac]

Rich people and poor people have different problems, the main problem that is most commonly faced by poor people is finance, they work to support their families so they can eat three times a day. Poor people only think about their fate and that of their families so they can eat and sleep well. While the rich have broader problems that have a relationship with the poor in terms of salary payment problems. The rich also don't only think about their fate, but there are tens or hundreds of poor people's fate that they have to think about if their business is not running effectively.

I will choose to solve the problems of the rich, not because I don't care about the fate of the poor, but when the problems of the rich are resolved, indirectly the problems of the poor are also solved.

You have an interesting perspective on the problem of the rich and the poor. It can be said that the problem of the poor completely depends on the rich, so as long as the rich can solve their problems, the poor will also partly solve their problems. Like what happens in times of crisis when companies and businesses file for bankruptcy, leading to widespread unemployment and it's a poor man's problem. And to solve this problem, we need new businesses, startups, and that's a problem that needs to be solved by the rich.

I completely agree with you. This is what I mean by stating that solving the problem of the rich helps on a bigger scale in a way that affects not only the rich but the poor as well. The rich have a higher influence and effect on the economy and other industries. Solving the problem of the poor, on the other hand, rarely affects the rich in any way. Hence, if given the chance, I'd rather solve the problem of the rich due to the effects it will cause for the majority.

This makes sense, but it all depends on how much the rich people are able to empower the lives of the poor, because some rich people are more concerned about developing their own business without looking at the situation of the people under them.
However, the problems of the rich and the poor will always coexist, at least people should also be able to solve the problems of the poor in order to get a better life

But what is the problem of the poor? Is that money?  and if you want them to have money, you have to provide jobs, you can't give them free money.  and only the rich have enough intelligence and potential to open companies and factories to provide jobs.  there is no one who doesn't care about money and growing his business, and once the rich can expand the business.  that means they are creating more jobs, and that can be said to be solving the problem of the poor.

[isaac_clarke22]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Reality is all of us need to make a living and we can't just keep carrying over in helping poor people just for the sake of solving the world problems. This isn't like you sacrificing your life to be a Saint or even generate popularity.

There would always be poor people because there's none, no other people would strive to work for other. Kinda reminds me of my curiosity before on what if everyone was just rich if not middle class in the society. How terrible would that be, I wonder?

[irhact]

Maybe it depends on the specific service you're rendering? I'm a business person already, and from my experience I can tell you that having a few rich people as clients helps you go a long way in your business. Just one contract from a rich person is enough to put money in your pocket for a long time. So that's what I'm definitely choosing. Don't forget that how successful you are will usually depend on the circle of people you operate within.

Very true, let use two barber that operates in different environment as an example and they both are offering services of keeping the hair neat. Those working in areas with wealthy individuals will be more successful than those working in areas with poor individual. For the same service, they'll be charging differently and the barber in the rich neighborhoods wouldn't have to have many customers to make money daily and some will request for home services that'll give the barber more money.

Solving the rich problem is always more profiting then that of the poor and from always interacting with the rich you can be exposed to more opportunities that the poor can't offer so unless you can solve the problem of both the rich and poor, choose rich problem to solve.

[KiaKia]

What problems do rich people have that they can't solve with money? Love? Can't decide which car to buy, and the garage only fits 12? How to avoid paying that 0.1% in taxes?

--Knight Hider

You have no idea, there are few problems that the rich can't buy and same problems happens with the poor too, there is a saying that money can't buy everything, apart from you saying love, that's not the only thing money can't buy.

You can only help a few number of people, because everyone have their limits and if you don't respect your own limit you will end up becoming like those poor people that you are trying to help.

Fixing the problem of the rich is most times hitting a jackpot, because the problem that rich people can't solve always have a bounty on them for the fixers.

[Alpha Marine]

but is easier to solve a rich man's problem than solving the poor cases since with the rich you have money as a tool to work with in solving the problem

I think it's easier to solve the problems of a poor person than to solve the problems of a rich person. For a problem to be a problem that Money can't solve then that problem is pretty big.
Most, if not all the problems of the poor can be solved by money.

A lot of poor people die because they don't have money to afford good health care. Some can't afford to raise money for a particular surgery and the person dies. It happens all the time. Imagine creating a solution to that kind of problem.

There was a time when malaria was a destroyer in some parts of Africa, especially West Africa. In those days, it didn't mean there was no treatment for malaria, but it was pretty expensive so the poor couldn't afford it. Today with as little as $5 you can treat your malaria.

It's no secret that the rich live longer than the poor, but further research has shown that the gap in life expectancy between the rich and the poor is increasing.

For the poor, 80% of their problem can be solved with money, provided that money is properly managed because money can give them everything they lack. But for the rich, most of them need what you can't give them.

[Altryist]

You have no idea, there are few problems that the rich can't buy and same problems happens with the poor too, there is a saying that money can't buy everything, apart from you saying love, that's not the only thing money can't buy.

You can only help a few number of people, because everyone have their limits and if you don't respect your own limit you will end up becoming like those poor people that you are trying to help.

Fixing the problem of the rich is most times hitting a jackpot, because the problem that rich people can't solve always have a bounty on them for the fixers.

You cannot solve the problem simply by giving money, it will not change the life of the person to whom you give money, except for a short period. Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach him how to fish and he will eat forever. From here it becomes clear that it is better to help a person correct the current situation, teach him how to improve his situation and he will be able to correct the situation. Giving everyone enough money will not work.

[xSkylarx]

You have no idea, there are few problems that the rich can't buy and same problems happens with the poor too, there is a saying that money can't buy everything, apart from you saying love, that's not the only thing money can't buy.

You can only help a few number of people, because everyone have their limits and if you don't respect your own limit you will end up becoming like those poor people that you are trying to help.

Fixing the problem of the rich is most times hitting a jackpot, because the problem that rich people can't solve always have a bounty on them for the fixers.

You cannot solve the problem simply by giving money, it will not change the life of the person to whom you give money, except for a short period. Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach him how to fish and he will eat forever. From here it becomes clear that it is better to help a person correct the current situation, teach him how to improve his situation and he will be able to correct the situation. Giving everyone enough money will not work.

It is just a short-term solution. If you give them money, that will only last for a few days, and then again, they are asking for money, which is also not worth it because instead of doing work, they will not work anymore and will just ask for money. That is why giving them a job or any source of income is more worth it than giving money. I am not sure if you are aware right now that the government is giving some financial aid to the poorest, which I am a proponent of, but others tend to exploit it; they will not do jobs and they just wait on it, though some are lucky enough to use it as capital to have a small business like food or a small store so that they can still accumulate some money from it.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

I will rather solve the problems of the poor, my reason being that, poor people tend to pay more to get their problems solved Ghana rich people, this is speaking from my own personal experience as a business man, I've done businesses with quite a lot of people, both the poor and the rich, and I can honestly and sincerely tell that poor people pay more to get their issues solved than rich people, so eat my services has to do with making money, I will prefer to solve poor people's problems, than solve that of the rich peoples, but then again, realistically speaking now, there is absolutely nothing wrong in providing a service that solves both poor people's problems and the rich people's problems all together, since all that matters at the end of the day is that problems are being solved.

[slapper]

I will rather solve the problems of the poor, my reason being that, poor people tend to pay more to get their problems solved Ghana rich people, this is speaking from my own personal experience as a business man, I've done businesses with quite a lot of people, both the poor and the rich, and I can honestly and sincerely tell that poor people pay more to get their issues solved than rich people, so eat my services has to do with making money, I will prefer to solve poor people's problems, than solve that of the rich peoples, but then again, realistically speaking now, there is absolutely nothing wrong in providing a service that solves both poor people's problems and the rich people's problems all together, since all that matters at the end of the day is that problems are being solved.

Poor people have grit. They'll give you their last dollar if it'll get them to a better place. You're suggesting poor people pay more? In my experience, the rich? They've got money, and with that, they leverage. They negotiate. They play the game. So if your numbers are saying poor people pay more, there's something amiss

Now, I'm not saying you're wrong, but rich folks have resources, networks, and tools that they can use to help the poor. I've seen it. They've got foundations, charities, you name it. If you're in the business of solving problems (and it sounds like you are) then think bigger. Solve problems for both. Expand. Double down on that solution of yours. And always remember, you can't put a price on solving problems; it's priceless

[DeathAngel]

I would prefer not to solve the problems of people based on their fiat wealth. For example a priest doesn’t classify people via their wealth, he will help people regardless of their wealth. I think it’s time we, as a society, stopped using money as a status symbol. We all bleed red, no matter how much money we have.

[JoyMarsha]

The problems of the rich are mostly on how to loan them some money, grow and expand their business, or pay some accumulated debts. But as for the poor, their problem is how to feed and train their children.  I'm using this kind of example because of what I've overheard rich and poor people talking about when they share their problems with me.

If I am in a position to assist both, I will focus on solving the issue facing the poor rather than the rich. I'm doing that because the rich are already successful in life, and they want to grow more of their business, while the poor struggle to make ends meet and advance in life. which can put their family's health at risk and hinder the fulfillment of their future dreams

[coolcoinz]

but is easier to solve a rich man's problem than solving the poor cases since with the rich you have money as a tool to work with in solving the problem

I think it's easier to solve the problems of a poor person than to solve the problems of a rich person. For a problem to be a problem that Money can't solve then that problem is pretty big.
Most, if not all the problems of the poor can be solved by money.

What comes to my mind after reading this is that most problems of the poor could be solved by the rich. If the rich started solving poor people's problems, maybe one of those poor people would be able to return the favor. It happens that the poor are often smart, they have able bodies, they can work their way up, but they weren't given the opportunity, weren't raised in a proper way.

Money doesn't solve the problems of the world but it certainly helps in putting things on the right track.

[Ryu_Ar1]

You have no idea, there are few problems that the rich can't buy and same problems happens with the poor too, there is a saying that money can't buy everything, apart from you saying love, that's not the only thing money can't buy.

You can only help a few number of people, because everyone have their limits and if you don't respect your own limit you will end up becoming like those poor people that you are trying to help.

Fixing the problem of the rich is most times hitting a jackpot, because the problem that rich people can't solve always have a bounty on them for the fixers.

You cannot solve the problem simply by giving money, it will not change the life of the person to whom you give money, except for a short period. Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach him how to fish and he will eat forever. From here it becomes clear that it is better to help a person correct the current situation, teach him how to improve his situation and he will be able to correct the situation. Giving everyone enough money will not work.

Agreed, because when talking about the poor for example when they are given as much money as possible but without being equipped with knowledge and opportunities it will only be used up and they are still the same in terms of life, although not all will be like that but most will definitely be like what I said.
Sometimes it is better to give them access to opportunities such as decent jobs or business development opportunities while getting guidance. It doesn't mean that we can't give money but when we give money, it will only be a temporary help in their lives and by doing something like this they will continue to be passive and wait for others to do the same by giving money so that they can survive in life.

[Mauser]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I wasn't aware that the rich have so many problems at the moment that's why I would rather be focusing on the poor people. Poorer people are always struggling and there will be new chances every year to provide helpful service. The only issue is that there isn't a lot of money to be made from the customers. The path to success here is to provide services to a large group of people to become profitable. When focusing on the rich people it's the exact opposite, there will only be a small number of clients. Another issue is how are you going to reach your customers. Social media is great to reach poorer people and attract them to your services, but not the rich and wealthy people. I think that to build up a customer base of high net worth individuals you need to have a big network. Best to focus on the area where you already have connections today and don't have to start from scratch.

[xSkylarx]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I wasn't aware that the rich have so many problems at the moment that's why I would rather be focusing on the poor people. Poorer people are always struggling and there will be new chances every year to provide helpful service. The only issue is that there isn't a lot of money to be made from the customers. The path to success here is to provide services to a large group of people to become profitable. When focusing on the rich people it's the exact opposite, there will only be a small number of clients. Another issue is how are you going to reach your customers. Social media is great to reach poorer people and attract them to your services, but not the rich and wealthy people. I think that to build up a customer base of high net worth individuals you need to have a big network. Best to focus on the area where you already have connections today and don't have to start from scratch.

Both are good, but just to add on rich, it is only small people that kind of purchase or avail your product, but it is one time, big time. Just imagine those luxurious cars, watches, and many more that only rich people can afford, but still they are earning a big profit as long as it has a name on it. On the poor side, it takes time to accumulate that money, but still they will purchase from you. What's good about serving poor people is that you can help them, and that makes you fulfilled as you are doing business while helping them.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I wasn't aware that the rich have so many problems at the moment that's why I would rather be focusing on the poor people. Poorer people are always struggling and there will be new chances every year to provide helpful service. The only issue is that there isn't a lot of money to be made from the customers. The path to success here is to provide services to a large group of people to become profitable. When focusing on the rich people it's the exact opposite, there will only be a small number of clients. Another issue is how are you going to reach your customers. Social media is great to reach poorer people and attract them to your services, but not the rich and wealthy people. I think that to build up a customer base of high net worth individuals you need to have a big network. Best to focus on the area where you already have connections today and don't have to start from scratch.

Both are good, but just to add on rich, it is only small people that kind of purchase or avail your product, but it is one time, big time. Just imagine those luxurious cars, watches, and many more that only rich people can afford, but still they are earning a big profit as long as it has a name on it. On the poor side, it takes time to accumulate that money, but still they will purchase from you. What's good about serving poor people is that you can help them, and that makes you fulfilled as you are doing business while helping them.

To be honest with you, serving poor people will make you richer than serving rich people as long as you are making money from the service you are providing or offering, like I said in my previous comment, poor people are always eager and ready to spend more money to have their problems solved than rich people.

Using the same car you mentioned as an example, a car dealer who specialises in selling only expensive cars that only Rich men can afford, might end up selling just two or three cars in a whole month because there are also other car dealers out there,  he's not the only one doing the business, but the car dealer who specialises in selling both cheap and expensive cars,  might end up selling 20 cheap cars in a month and two or three expensive cars in the same month , at the end of the day, if we calculate the profit of this two car dealers, we will discover that the car dealer who specialises in selling both expensive and cheap cars made more profit than the one that only sells expensive cars..

Like I mentioned before, as a business or as a person, nothing stops one from serving both the rich and the poor, I think it all depends on where you live, if you live in an area where only rich men stay, then you can serve only Rich men, but if you live in an area where both rich men and poor men are staying, nothing stops you from serving both.

[dothebeats]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I wasn't aware that the rich have so many problems at the moment that's why I would rather be focusing on the poor people. Poorer people are always struggling and there will be new chances every year to provide helpful service. The only issue is that there isn't a lot of money to be made from the customers. The path to success here is to provide services to a large group of people to become profitable. When focusing on the rich people it's the exact opposite, there will only be a small number of clients. Another issue is how are you going to reach your customers. Social media is great to reach poorer people and attract them to your services, but not the rich and wealthy people. I think that to build up a customer base of high net worth individuals you need to have a big network. Best to focus on the area where you already have connections today and don't have to start from scratch.

Both are good, but just to add on rich, it is only small people that kind of purchase or avail your product, but it is one time, big time. Just imagine those luxurious cars, watches, and many more that only rich people can afford, but still they are earning a big profit as long as it has a name on it. On the poor side, it takes time to accumulate that money, but still they will purchase from you. What's good about serving poor people is that you can help them, and that makes you fulfilled as you are doing business while helping them.

To be honest with you, serving poor people will make you richer than serving rich people as long as you are making money from the service you are providing or offering, like I said in my previous comment, poor people are always eager and ready to spend more money to have their problems solved than rich people.

Using the same car you mentioned as an example, a car dealer who specialises in selling only expensive cars that only Rich men can afford, might end up selling just two or three cars in a whole month because there are also other car dealers out there,  he's not the only one doing the business, but the car dealer who specialises in selling both cheap and expensive cars,  might end up selling 20 cheap cars in a month and two or three expensive cars in the same month , at the end of the day, if we calculate the profit of this two car dealers, we will discover that the car dealer who specialises in selling both expensive and cheap cars made more profit than the one that only sells expensive cars..

Like I mentioned before, as a business or as a person, nothing stops one from serving both the rich and the poor, I think it all depends on where you live, if you live in an area where only rich men stay, then you can serve only Rich men, but if you live in an area where both rich men and poor men are staying, nothing stops you from serving both.

This is true, why cater to only the rich when you can cater to both parties and earn more? In businesses, especially if your goal is to get as much profit as you can, then it is simply better to just sell as much as you can to either rich or poor clients/customers. This is absolutely good advice for businesses that are just starting as you want to attract more customers/clients, and being picky with whom you will sell your product/service will not help your case. You want to be known out there, especially since you will have competitors that are trying to attract the same target clients/customers you have, therefore widen your scope and you will also expand the possibility of profit.

[demonica]

I would choose to solve problems of the poor. Cause majority of the problems that the poor have, can mostly be solved by money. And as for the rich problem, it could differ in a lot of things since their problems cannot be solved by money. It could be about love, health and such. But choosing solving the poor's problems doesn't mean a short term solution cause if the "solution" we're talking about is by giving them money or what, they will still end up having the same problem after a period of time when they run out of money.

But tbh, solving the poor people's problem would be so hard to do, cause if it's just as easy as answering this question, there could be lesser problems.

[gabbie2010]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

I would choose to solve the problem of the poor rather than the rich because I would take it as a personal sacrifice to help the poor having knew their own problems would be far more than the problems of the rich, once the problems of the poor is solved the problems of the rich would lessen this is a known fact if the poor is hungry the rich would not no peace, take care of the poor the rich would have a rest of mind, empower the poor the society would record less crime rate invariably their purchasing power would increase because the major problem of the poor is lack of enough money or financial wherewithal to cater for their daily basic needs.

[Uruhara]

I would prefer not to solve the problems of people based on their fiat wealth. For example a priest doesn’t classify people via their wealth, he will help people regardless of their wealth. I think it’s time we, as a society, stopped using money as a status symbol. We all bleed red, no matter how much money we have.

Well actually humans do have the same degree. Be it a rich person or a poor person. Everything must be respected properly. And all must be helped when they ask for help or need help. But sometimes in life there are always multiple choices where we cannot choose both. Because sometimes we can only choose one. And this is where our minds are tested. As in the case raised in this topic. Helping the problems of the poor or helping the problems of the rich. Both have differences as well as similarities. It's just that we have to prioritize one of them in certain situations. So the answer will indeed vary depending on our ability to provide assistance. for example if we are rich people. Then we can provide assistance to the poor by providing job vacancies and providing decent wages. And poor people can also help rich people by working for rich people and lightening the work that rich people cannot do.

[Yatsan]

On my end  I'd also choose to solve my problems first. Quite out of the context but how will I be able to help others if I cannot help myself?

I would prefer not to solve the problems of people based on their fiat wealth. For example a priest doesn’t classify people via their wealth, he will help people regardless of their wealth. I think it’s time we, as a society, stopped using money as a status symbol. We all bleed red, no matter how much money we have.

Well actually humans do have the same degree. Be it a rich person or a poor person. Everything must be respected properly. And all must be helped when they ask for help or need help. But sometimes in life there are always multiple choices where we cannot choose both. Because sometimes we can only choose one. And this is where our minds are tested. As in the case raised in this topic. Helping the problems of the poor or helping the problems of the rich. Both have differences as well as similarities. It's just that we have to prioritize one of them in certain situations. So the answer will indeed vary depending on our ability to provide assistance. for example if we are rich people. Then we can provide assistance to the poor by providing job vacancies and providing decent wages. And poor people can also help rich people by working for rich people and lightening the work that rich people cannot do.

As much as I wanted to side with one of the options, I agree that it does depend. Whether you are rich or poor  your problems are valid thus you shall be helped. But with prioritizing which is which, then that will indeed depend on the situation. Think of this analogy; a rich man being robbed and a poor man asking for a dime. Answer is obvious right? Also  it depends on the type of individual you are. Bottomline here is  no matter who you help, choose depending on your capabilities as well. Also, we cannot help people if they are the ones who aren't even trying to help themselves.

But if this is will be views with practicality, problems of the poor are undending and that won't be limited to money alone. There'll be others such as education and such. On the other hand, if you choose to help the rich ones, they may or might not help the poor ones.

[Davian144]

I would choose to solve problems of the poor. Cause majority of the problems that the poor have, can mostly be solved by money. And as for the rich problem, it could differ in a lot of things since their problems cannot be solved by money. It could be about love, health and such. But choosing solving the poor's problems doesn't mean a short term solution cause if the "solution" we're talking about is by giving them money or what, they will still end up having the same problem after a period of time when they run out of money.

Everyone always has very diverse problems in their life, no matter whether the person is rich or poor. Because as long as we are still living in this world, problems will still exist and the task is to find super wise solutions in order to solve them quite precisely. And if you mention about the problems of rich people in the romance section, I think not all rich people in this world experience that because love problems are very personal problems for everyone. So the solution will also be very different, while for health problems I think rich people can also solve it themselves because that person has a lot of money to handle it quite well.

But tbh, solving the poor people's problem would be so hard to do, cause if it's just as easy as answering this question, there could be lesser problems.

Actually, none of the problems are easy to solve, even though every problem has a solution to be solved. But in terms of solving problems, we must also see solutions that are wiser than solutions that only solve the problem for only a moment. For example, the problem with poor people is that basically they always lack money. However, the wisest solution is to give them a job that can earn money every day so that they can be a little free from the problems they often face in their lives. Not by directly giving them money in cash because when the money we give runs out, they will definitely become poor again in their lives.

[dothebeats]

On my end  I'd also choose to solve my problems first. Quite out of the context but how will I be able to help others if I cannot help myself?

I would prefer not to solve the problems of people based on their fiat wealth. For example a priest doesn’t classify people via their wealth, he will help people regardless of their wealth. I think it’s time we, as a society, stopped using money as a status symbol. We all bleed red, no matter how much money we have.

Well actually humans do have the same degree. Be it a rich person or a poor person. Everything must be respected properly. And all must be helped when they ask for help or need help. But sometimes in life there are always multiple choices where we cannot choose both. Because sometimes we can only choose one. And this is where our minds are tested. As in the case raised in this topic. Helping the problems of the poor or helping the problems of the rich. Both have differences as well as similarities. It's just that we have to prioritize one of them in certain situations. So the answer will indeed vary depending on our ability to provide assistance. for example if we are rich people. Then we can provide assistance to the poor by providing job vacancies and providing decent wages. And poor people can also help rich people by working for rich people and lightening the work that rich people cannot do.

As much as I wanted to side with one of the options, I agree that it does depend. Whether you are rich or poor  your problems are valid thus you shall be helped. But with prioritizing which is which, then that will indeed depend on the situation. Think of this analogy; a rich man being robbed and a poor man asking for a dime. Answer is obvious right? Also  it depends on the type of individual you are. Bottomline here is  no matter who you help, choose depending on your capabilities as well. Also, we cannot help people if they are the ones who aren't even trying to help themselves.

But if this is will be views with practicality, problems of the poor are undending and that won't be limited to money alone. There'll be others such as education and such. On the other hand, if you choose to help the rich ones, they may or might not help the poor ones.

That is indeed true, you may be able to choose who you want to help, but it will depend on your capabilities. No matter how much your drive is to help the people around you, none of it will matter if you do not have the capacity to actually give help. It will just be a thought that will not actually apply any changes to them. And I also agree with you on your other point, rich or poor status does not matter if they are not willing to help themselves, because even if you get them out of their bad situation or solve their problems, chances are they will find themselves back to that point after awhile because they will not learn, they will also end up relying on you and on others to get them out of any bad stuff they are in again.

[Y3shot]

I would choose to solve problems of the poor. Cause majority of the problems that the poor have, can mostly be solved by money. And as for the rich problem, it could differ in a lot of things since their problems cannot be solved by money. It could be about love, health and such. But choosing solving the poor's problems doesn't mean a short term solution cause if the "solution" we're talking about is by giving them money or what, they will still end up having the same problem after a period of time when they run out of money.

But tbh, solving the poor people's problem would be so hard to do, cause if it's just as easy as answering this question, there could be lesser problems.

As a man the worse problem a can ever have is being broke, this is a problem that can run someone mental health and do things that was never planned to be done. Solving the problem of poverty is the biggest problem you can take from the life of man, u think this is the most important thing everyone want. Most of the problem of the rich man can be solve with money, but all the problems of the poor man ties down to money.

 If a rich man is having health problems, money can solve the basic things of the  challenge but if the poor man is having a problem pertaining to health if their is no money it can lead to death.  Helping the poor man to solve his challenge is the best thing to do to humanity.

[Negotiation]

Both the rich and the poor have problems but the rich have a lot of money with which they can easily solve the problem. The poor cannot do anything because of lack of money, which does lead to more extreme poverty. It is not possible to completely eliminate the problem of poverty but taking some necessary steps will cure it to some extent. Although it has set a global example of poverty eradication, it has not reduced the disparity between the rich and the poor. If poverty alleviation and social development are to be sustained, development activities in rural areas should be increased. Areas of investment should be created in developmental sectors. To reduce this disparity and sustain success in poverty alleviation, the budget must be formulated keeping in mind the extreme poor.

[Smack That Ace]

I would choose to solve problems of the poor. Cause majority of the problems that the poor have, can mostly be solved by money. And as for the rich problem, it could differ in a lot of things since their problems cannot be solved by money. It could be about love, health and such. But choosing solving the poor's problems doesn't mean a short term solution cause if the "solution" we're talking about is by giving them money or what, they will still end up having the same problem after a period of time when they run out of money.

But tbh, solving the poor people's problem would be so hard to do, cause if it's just as easy as answering this question, there could be lesser problems.

If you already know the problem of the poor is money then you should choose to solve the problem of the rich first because the rich provide jobs and income for the poor. If the rich have problems, then obviously the problems of the poor are also very difficult to solve. For example, the economic crisis is causing many companies to go bankrupt and thereby causing unemployment. Whose problem is it? And to solve unemployment we need to do?

The rich and the poor have a close relationship with each other and we need to solve common problems to be able to completely solve the problem. You cannot solve the problems of the poor if you choose to ignore the rich.

[abel1337]

I think solving problem of the poor is what I want to choose. Knowing that most of the poor people doesn't have proper education and financial education at the first place. If their problems is connected in terms of surviving, it would be no brainer where rich people can survive easily with the vast amount of money they have. I know that rich people can give jobs to poor people but solving poor people problems carry more value for me because it somehow connected with their survival. We revolve on money or on things with value. Rich people has a lot of that but most poor people doesn't have. Without money, the struggle of surviving is an everyday routine.

[Pierre 2]

Solving problems of poor BUT educated/capitalist/freedom loving people will always work. People underestimate how good poor people can achieve when they are not limited with their wealth. But obviously not lazy, uneducated labor. Education is a must. Financial knowledge is a must. I don't hate rich people but most of them are crony to be honest. They don't deserve more help in life, they always do good for themselves.

[slapper]

Both the rich and the poor have problems but the rich have a lot of money with which they can easily solve the problem. The poor cannot do anything because of lack of money, which does lead to more extreme poverty. It is not possible to completely eliminate the problem of poverty but taking some necessary steps will cure it to some extent. Although it has set a global example of poverty eradication, it has not reduced the disparity between the rich and the poor. If poverty alleviation and social development are to be sustained, development activities in rural areas should be increased. Areas of investment should be created in developmental sectors. To reduce this disparity and sustain success in poverty alleviation, the budget must be formulated keeping in mind the extreme poor.

Money isn't a magic bullet for the rich; it's just a tool. But let's be honest: the rich do have better tools to deal with life's challenges. This is not an excuse; it's just a harsh fact of modern business. Your reasoning falls apart, though, when you say that the poor are useless and can't change their situation

Even though it's good to put money into development and rural areas, it's important to realize that traditional economic answers are becoming less useful in our increasingly digital world. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are making wealth more accessible to everyone, giving people more power, and putting ressure on standard financial institutions. Yes, there are differences, but cryptocurrencies offer a free way for the poor to deal with them

Choosing to help the rich with their problems? That's the old way of thinking. Accept the blockchain, level the playing field, and help us create a fair future. Even if it means taking down institutions that have been around for hundreds of years

[Juse14]

I think solving problem of the poor is what I want to choose. Knowing that most of the poor people doesn't have proper education and financial education at the first place. If their problems is connected in terms of surviving, it would be no brainer where rich people can survive easily with the vast amount of money they have. I know that rich people can give jobs to poor people but solving poor people problems carry more value for me because it somehow connected with their survival. We revolve on money or on things with value. Rich people has a lot of that but most poor people doesn't have. Without money, the struggle of surviving is an everyday routine.

That is a very good goal, eradicating poverty is a difficult thing because it requires power, strength and wealth to do that, it is not an easy thing to do by one person. You also need a lot of time for your goal to run well.
State three is a place where there are more poor people, maybe it will be a very suitable place for you to complete your goal. but in my opinion, eradicating poverty significantly lies in the first step, namely education, where education will greatly influence the rate of human development in correcting life problems, the more people have good education, the less financial problems their lives will have, so in my opinion this is That could be your focus, sir, or do you have another way?

[gunhell16]

This is just my opinion, if the person I am going to help is a rich person, Then I am capable of helping him/her and he/she has good manners to be helpful to others or people who need help, I will do it if I help him/her. Why? because that person because of the wealth that he/she has many poor people he can also help.

Because as the saying goes, what is sown will surely be reaped abundantly. So many people will also benefit from what is planted. Although, it's not bad to help the poor, it's just that a poor person can only be helped to a limited extent. This is just my opinion and perception anyway.

[MFahad]

In reality, resolving the issues of the wealthy isn't all that challenging. Even when it comes to health problems, every individual shares the same health concerns, as we're all human. What complicates solving the problems of the affluent is the emergence of our business orientations. Yet, the real complexity arises from our business mindset. The playing field in the business realm among the wealthy is a fierce one; numerous individuals vie for easy gains from the affluent.

Insurance companies are even willing to incur hefty marketing costs to capture the attention of the affluent. The competition in the realms of insurance, finance, and healthcare is notably intense. This stems from the fact that the market of the affluent is both dense and fiercely competitive. Consequently, it becomes a challenge for ordinary individuals to emerge victorious in this contest.

Health related issues are same in both poor and wealthy because they are humans but the main thing is treatment so I think that if poor people get money then they become cured by proper treatment but sometimes wealthy people cannot get cured instead of having money so this issue is very serious for them.

I think the more money comes more healthy related problems originates I don't know what the reason but I have experienced that wealthy people are more sad than poor ones.
According to you statement I think that in a field of business poor are depended on wealthy individuals as if they wants to involved in business then business grows rapidly but if they denied to make investment in any business then such business hardly continues to a successful destination.

[Oilacris]

In reality, resolving the issues of the wealthy isn't all that challenging. Even when it comes to health problems, every individual shares the same health concerns, as we're all human. What complicates solving the problems of the affluent is the emergence of our business orientations. Yet, the real complexity arises from our business mindset. The playing field in the business realm among the wealthy is a fierce one; numerous individuals vie for easy gains from the affluent.

Insurance companies are even willing to incur hefty marketing costs to capture the attention of the affluent. The competition in the realms of insurance, finance, and healthcare is notably intense. This stems from the fact that the market of the affluent is both dense and fiercely competitive. Consequently, it becomes a challenge for ordinary individuals to emerge victorious in this contest.

Health related issues are same in both poor and wealthy because they are humans but the main thing is treatment so I think that if poor people get money then they become cured by proper treatment but sometimes wealthy people cannot get cured instead of having money so this issue is very serious for them.

I think the more money comes more healthy related problems originates I don't know what the reason but I have experienced that wealthy people are more sad than poor ones.
According to you statement I think that in a field of business poor are depended on wealthy individuals as if they wants to involved in business then business grows rapidly but if they denied to make investment in any business then such business hardly continues to a successful destination.

When it comes to potential health problems the wealthy people are more susceptible into those complicated illness or health issues compared to those poor ones.Why? they are living in a surrounding or place on which it is really that clean or something comfortable and out from those bad elements around or not simply that being exposed too much and on the time that there would be some sudden change of environment or able to meet up people who are sick or having those illnesses then they are really that prone and cant really that fight off that much because of their weak immune i should say.
Im not saying that rich peoples does have weak immune but we know that rich people do mostly get those illness which are non curable and despite on having the funds or financial capacity
it wouldnt really be still giving out that assurance that they would really get well. Also, having tons of money doesnt indicate nor assure happy life. Yes, you could travel, you could buy all the things
you do want but there are things which cant be bought like love and respect but of course people are born greedy and having tons of money is something that already a main common goal for most people.

[panganib999]

The problems of the poor far outweigh the issues that the rich has over their extravagant and little lives. For the most part, they don't have to worry about dying of starvation and being homeless which are pretty massive issues for the poor. Once those are solved we can pretty much rely on these people to be functioning members of the society that could help enhance the workforce of any country on the planet. For instance, in the US alone, the fact that they have millions of homeless people on the streets just waiting to get that big break they deserve so they can turn their lives around is enough of a motivation for any legislator with half a brain and a heart for these people to pass laws that encourage them to get back on their feet and recover with the government's help.

[Nwada001]

If I am to reply to you and share my own opinion and whom I will like to support and the problem I will like to solve based on an entrepreneur mindset, I will have to check scale and observe among the both which will be beneficial to my business and which of the individuals will be able to push my business to the next level, which will bring me to the rich people, as they have the capacity of paying higher if the problem solving tools that I have at hand can be purchased and exchanged for money, then they will be of better choice and interest, as few of them can be able to cover up the sales that you might be thinking of covering in a whole month just under the interval of days. Which is what every business-oriented person will want.
 
But if I'm to look at it the other way around and sympathise with the people who are most needy and those who are actually in need of help, and I need little to nothing in return, then I will have to choose between helping a lot of poor people and helping the rich, as the rich have higher chances of getting whatever they need from somewhere else, whereas those people in the poor category won't have a lot of options presented to them, which will make me consider helping them rather than wasting my resources on few people who won't value it.

[Uruhara]

This is just my opinion, if the person I am going to help is a rich person, Then I am capable of helping him/her and he/she has good manners to be helpful to others or people who need help, I will do it if I help him/her. Why? because that person because of the wealth that he/she has many poor people he can also help.

Because as the saying goes, what is sown will surely be reaped abundantly. So many people will also benefit from what is planted. Although, it's not bad to help the poor, it's just that a poor person can only be helped to a limited extent. This is just my opinion and perception anyway.

So true. And actually both options are equally useful. Helping the problems faced by people or helping the problems faced by poor people, actually helping one of them will still bring benefits to both. Well when we help the problems of the rich then in the end the rich will also help the problems of the poor. And vice versa, by helping poor people it will actually help a little with the problems of rich people. Because rich people and poor people actually both need each other. The rich need the services of the poor in helping their daily work. And poor people also need help from rich people, such as to get jobs and receive wages from rich people. So helping both of them will still benefit both of them. It doesn't matter which direction we help first.

[Richkiedx]

for me I want my life to be good for my family I want to achieve all their dreams my dream is their dream as a first born child I will do everything to make all of that come true even if it's hard to endure just to make my life better families

[Richkiedx]

It's a problem for poor people.. why when you're rich! you can buy everything you can while if you are poor will they trample on your dignity I want you to be rich or poor everyone should be equal I know no one is rich or poor they are the same people!!!

[knowngunman]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

In a situation like this, certain things need to be considered before making your conclusion. Sometimes, helping one or few rich men is equivalent to helping many poor people indirectly. For instance, if a rich man company with hundreds or thousands of poor men working is on the verge of collapsing and you have the capacity to help the company back to functionality again you can see that helping the rich in this circumstance is paramount than helping poor people directly who in few days will still need to be helped again. So, it all depends on the situation at hand.

On the other hand, helping lots of poors to grow will help to bridge the poverty gap in our society as they're likely to render help some days. Poor people are the threat to economy and that's why they need help the most because helping them is an avenue to healthy and standard economy as they'll no longer depends on government or other person anymore.

[dothebeats]

It's a problem for poor people.. why when you're rich! you can buy everything you can while if you are poor will they trample on your dignity I want you to be rich or poor everyone should be equal I know no one is rich or poor they are the same people!!!

I am very familiar with your point regarding the obvious difference in treatment and lifestyle of the rich and the poor, however, the topic being discussed here isn't the state of the two statuses but the debate between solving the problem of the poor and the rich and which one will the majority choose. Despite the difference in treatment that the rich and the poor get in society, there is no doubt that both statuses have their own problems to deal with and in some occasions solving the problem of the rich can have an indirect effect on the poor and vice versa. Hence, this post is trying to see how the majority of the members of the community or this forum evaluate whether solving the problem of the rich is easier and more beneficial or is solving the problem of the poor. No one is erasing the fact that the two statuses have a significant difference that divides them into various factors, in fact, it is these difference that members are taking into account as they answer OP's question. I just thought you might need a clarification of the post and question as your answer is diving into a different discussion.

[Macoach]

I wont be sentimental on this because getting rich is a choice and as well getting poor is a choice. You choose which one you want to be. This question is kind of tricky to me but il solve problems for everyone for everyone class in the country. Something that would benefit both the rich and the poor. Wealth and income aren't limitless, although the hope is that they can become larger in the future than they are right now.

Also, while rich people getting richer doesn't inherently harm the poor, that doesn't imply that there aren't ways the rich might get richer that do harm the poor, either intentionally or as a side-effect.  I don't see inequality as a problem and at that even it is it affects both the poor and rich so why not solve problems for both.

[Agbamoni]

I wont be sentimental on this because getting rich is a choice and as well getting poor is a choice. You choose which one you want to be. This question is kind of tricky to me but il solve problems for everyone for everyone class in the country. Something that would benefit both the rich and the poor. Wealth and income aren't limitless, although the hope is that they can become larger in the future than they are right now.

Also, while rich people getting richer doesn't inherently harm the poor, that doesn't imply that there aren't ways the rich might get richer that do harm the poor, either intentionally or as a side-effect.  I don't see inequality as a problem and at that even it is it affects both the poor and rich so why not solve problems for both.

Given that you don't seem to recognize inequality as an issue, I'm not sure whatever element of inequality speaks to you. According to what I've read in the responses thus far, inequality has been shown to hinder economic progress, exacerbate poverty, foster societal mistrust that can lead to the dissolution of social ties, and even threaten the democratic process itself.

Even if they see some income growth, the poor nonetheless suffer from high inequality since it raises their cost of living. Luxury and useless products are frequently purchased by wealthy people in search of higher returns, which drives up prices particularly for things like housing, faster than the wages of the poorest. Do you disagree that high inequality creates these problems and makes it harder for the poor even while they obtain some part of growth?

[SmartGold01]

Problem solving depends on the field and area you find yourself, you can a little problems by saving thousand of soul by either preventing a serious incident that could cause a building to burn down, at this point you have solved a problems that involves all kinds of people which is either left for the government of such country to choose between which area you should be employed to function as a problem solver in that department.
Solving a problems for the rich gives you an access to became known while solving for poor gives you the room to become of charitable, whereby depending on God for your rewards.

But however, working for the rich or solving a problem for the rich most times doesn't guaranteed your success because many individuals who are working with the government doesn't solely became rich, typical example are teachers in my country. They are teaching at this point solving problems not only problems but help to raise the country and then government aren't increasing their salaries. Yet they are still under financial stress which I think isn't worth working for such people either be it Rich or the government. Self employed is always better at least it reliefs you from financial hassle.

[Doan9269]

We know that people varies in terms of their needs and how urgent they appear to them, we can also consider this that apparently everyone has one or two challenges that they needs solution to in what they do, we can also finds many other means of getting other people's needs solved when we see that ours can still be managed up over time without us being affected, we need to realize that life itself has many challenges and people's needs are never ending, the more we solve one the more others are coming after each other.

[Davian144]

for me I want my life to be good for my family I want to achieve all their dreams my dream is their dream as a first born child I will do everything to make all of that come true even if it's hard to endure just to make my life better families

If that's what you want, then dream while trying. Because any dream will not come true without being accompanied by effort.

It's a problem for poor people.. why when you're rich! you can buy everything you can while if you are poor will they trample on your dignity I want you to be rich or poor everyone should be equal I know no one is rich or poor they are the same people!!!

Everyone's rich and poor are only seen from a few things and that is usually judged by others, not by ourselves. Every person who is considered rich by other people must be seen from several aspects through their life, one of which is through their wealth which is already very large so that other people will definitely think that people who are considered rich have a lot of money and do not have problems in their lives. However, not everyone is like that, because rich people also have problems in their lives, even though these problems are not related to money.

Likewise with people who are considered poor by those around them from several assessments, be it through social status or wealth. Not all poor people experience serious enough problems in their lives, although most poor people experience problems with their finances which are indeed taken seriously. But there are also those who are considered poor who can live with gratitude and affluence even though other people consider them poor people who in their opinion do not have much money.

[Strongkored]

If this question were asked to us as ordinary people, of course we would prefer to help the poor because without help the poor will find it difficult to escape poverty, while the rich will need help from their fellow rich.
But if this question were asked of state officials, I'm pretty sure they would answer the rich, because helping them will help the poor to have a better life.
We can see that when a country is experiencing economic problems, a larger portion is given to entrepreneurs, compared to direct assistance to the poor, because the calculation is that the poor only need help with food, while the rich or entrepreneurs have a more complex problem.
Assistance to the poor should not only be in the form of food but also employment and education because food is only temporary assistance while employment and education are to help them to be independent, and later can help others who need help.

[Ahli38]

We know that people varies in terms of their needs and how urgent they appear to them, we can also consider this that apparently everyone has one or two challenges that they needs solution to in what they do, we can also finds many other means of getting other people's needs solved when we see that ours can still be managed up over time without us being affected, we need to realize that life itself has many challenges and people's needs are never ending, the more we solve one the more others are coming after each other.

So true. That is a reality that we must be aware of. Every time we solve one problem, another problem will arise. But in problem solving there are indeed many factors that must be considered to decide which problem should be fixed first. And so it is in fixing the problems that the rich and the poor have. I personally would probably start with myself. And after the problem itself is fixed. Only then will I start to help fix the problems of the people closest to me. It doesn't matter if it's poor or rich.

[Chilwell]

Solving problems of poor BUT educated/capitalist/freedom loving people will always work. People underestimate how good poor people can achieve when they are not limited with their wealth. But obviously not lazy, uneducated labor. Education is a must. Financial knowledge is a must. I don't hate rich people but most of them are crony to be honest. They don't deserve more help in life, they always do good for themselves.

When we talk about problem of poor people and rich people in this case poor people problems is always a financial problem while the rich people problems is also financial problems because the poor need little to survive and the rich aiming for money, but there is a saying that "the higher the money, the higher the problem". Rich people problems are also beyond the financial alone, it also comprise of some many things.

I will not choose who to help among the poor and rich people, this will only depends on the kind of problems they had then choose the one I can survive. For someone to say I can't help rich people because the have money and they only love themselves is a bad idea. You are poor today and I think you will be praying to be rich tomorrow, so if you turn out be rich tomorrow will you be happy with your intentions.

[gunhell16]

Problem solving depends on the field and area you find yourself, you can a little problems by saving thousand of soul by either preventing a serious incident that could cause a building to burn down, at this point you have solved a problems that involves all kinds of people which is either left for the government of such country to choose between which area you should be employed to function as a problem solver in that department.
Solving a problems for the rich gives you an access to became known while solving for poor gives you the room to become of charitable, whereby depending on God for your rewards.

But however, working for the rich or solving a problem for the rich most times doesn't guaranteed your success because many individuals who are working with the government doesn't solely became rich, typical example are teachers in my country. They are teaching at this point solving problems not only problems but help to raise the country and then government aren't increasing their salaries. Yet they are still under financial stress which I think isn't worth working for such people either be it Rich or the government. Self employed is always better at least it reliefs you from financial hassle.

That's right, when you are self-employed, we know how many or to what extent we can help people. And if there is a rich person we can help, I'm sure it's not financial. That's rich and has a lot of money, because we often help other people who we don't know are rich. You know what that means.

There are rich people because sometimes their lives are saved by something that a poor person did not expect, the poor person had no idea that the rich person was saved from disaster. The rich person owed a debt to a poor person. So in order for him to somehow repay the poor person for saving him, he will reciprocate with financial help that the poor person did not expect, although the rich person knows that he cannot afford to have a poor person save his life. This is just an illustrative example.

[SmartGold01]

Snip

That's right, when you are self-employed, we know how many or to what extent we can help people. And if there is a rich person we can help, I'm sure it's not financial. That's rich and has a lot of money, because we often help other people who we don't know are rich. You know what that means.

There are rich people because sometimes their lives are saved by something that a poor person did not expect, the poor person had no idea that the rich person was saved from disaster. The rich person owed a debt to a poor person. So in order for him to somehow repay the poor person for saving him, he will reciprocate with financial help that the poor person did not expect, although the rich person knows that he cannot afford to have a poor person save his life. This is just an illustrative example.

What you must know about the rich or poor is that no can entirely depends on himself or herself for any assistance or to have all things done with their money, naturally we need both each others to excel in our nation but most of the rich people turns it against the poor maybe having this act of humour that the poor aren't supposed to be in their class, yes that is true for sure but whatever they are today or being producing without the poor or the average people I don't think that could work effectively. So sometimes the rich should always try to be hospitable and charitable, irrespective of their position or firm today.

[Ever-young]

Many people might want to choose to solve the problem of the rich, as their are possibilities of them very getting favor from the rich at the end of the day.

But me I will choose to solve the problem of many poor people, as that appears to be the right thing do, one thing that motive someone sometimes to do what ever they want to do is how many people can benefit from that thing that they are doing be it business or any form of organization, I know profit and gain will also be included, but what will be the use of spending all that you have added to those that already have it but are not just satisfied rather they need more.

Every little help that you give to the poor are much more appreciated and can easily be noticed and can also easily add value to the society than what we give to the rich. In solving societal problems one should always focus on those who are not going to be able to provide and cater for their needs them self, so that is what am going to do, I will rather add value to someone life than earn/gain favor from people.

[Asuspawer09]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

For sure it's better to solve the problem of the poor, I mean what's going to be the problem of the rich is just how they are going to multiply their investments probably, meaning they already have their investments or money and they just need to multiply that or have multiple sources of income in order to become an even richer right? I mean just compare that to a poor problem, it is how they are going to start from scratch how they are going to start earning and have multiple incomes in order to become rich or at least financially stable.

Both of them probably is going to be difficult for the most part and it doesnt really matter because it is all a challenge for us, and what ever what the challenges in our life are there is always a way to solve them. I heard from a podcast about financial savings where they said that it doesnt matter how many times you fail, what matter is how many times you pick yourself up because we are all a product of failing, and being successful is not easy, so it's normal to fail we just need to keep on trying until we finally made it.

[mvdheuvel1983]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

[topbitcoin]

We know that people varies in terms of their needs and how urgent they appear to them, we can also consider this that apparently everyone has one or two challenges that they needs solution to in what they do, we can also finds many other means of getting other people's needs solved when we see that ours can still be managed up over time without us being affected, we need to realize that life itself has many challenges and people's needs are never ending, the more we solve one the more others are coming after each other.

It's true and I can't deny that everyone has different needs and over time these needs will continue to increase. However, this returns to each individual in responding to this matter, where when the needs begin to increase, this also needs to be balanced with increased efforts as well. and I think that at this time we cannot only rely on income from one side so that our needs can be met. However, working overtime is also not the right choice because it can threaten our health. And with existing technological advancements, I think trading is the right choice to be able to increase our income, so that we can meet our needs and have savings to answer urgent needs in the future. However, this must also be accompanied by adequate skills and knowledge.

[Uruhara]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

From your explanation I learned a lesson that solving a problem in one corner will also result in problems in other corners being resolved. Well this makes a lot of sense and I think that's how it's going to go. Both parties can benefit from each other on the one hand but on the one hand if one party is harmed then the other party can also be harmed. Although there are certain aspects that will benefit one party more. For example, if rich people open up a lot of jobs. But they give low wages to their workers. well in this angle only the rich benefit. Poor people will be a little disadvantaged because their work is not properly appreciated. But in general there are still benefits for both parties. Because the poor are also still helped even though the salary is not high which is not in accordance with their hard work.

[xSkylarx]

We know that people varies in terms of their needs and how urgent they appear to them, we can also consider this that apparently everyone has one or two challenges that they needs solution to in what they do, we can also finds many other means of getting other people's needs solved when we see that ours can still be managed up over time without us being affected, we need to realize that life itself has many challenges and people's needs are never ending, the more we solve one the more others are coming after each other.

So true. That is a reality that we must be aware of. Every time we solve one problem, another problem will arise. But in problem solving there are indeed many factors that must be considered to decide which problem should be fixed first. And so it is in fixing the problems that the rich and the poor have. I personally would probably start with myself. And after the problem itself is fixed. Only then will I start to help fix the problems of the people closest to me. It doesn't matter if it's poor or rich.

How would you be able to fix other problems if even yourself is already broke? You have a point, and again, most of those businessmen have done it before, like they've already tried it on themselves or on their relatives, like helping other people.
 
We should also make sure that solving other problems can also solve them for you, meaning if you are releasing some products or services to them, they should work on you or on your relatives so that you can be sure that they are working.

[bitLeap]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

From your explanation I learned a lesson that solving a problem in one corner will also result in problems in other corners being resolved. Well this makes a lot of sense and I think that's how it's going to go. Both parties can benefit from each other on the one hand but on the one hand if one party is harmed then the other party can also be harmed. Although there are certain aspects that will benefit one party more. For example, if rich people open up a lot of jobs. But they give low wages to their workers. well in this angle only the rich benefit. Poor people will be a little disadvantaged because their work is not properly appreciated. But in general there are still benefits for both parties. Because the poor are also still helped even though the salary is not high which is not in accordance with their hard work.

Now in a situation like this is a situation that we must look at from various perspectives that will ultimately provide a solution that will embrace all parties to be involved in it and mutually benefit each other. We can't keep thinking about who we have to solve the problem, but we have to think about how one action we take will solve the problem or at least we will have an effect or help all parties a little.
And in this case I agree that maybe there will be people who benefit more, but overall it helps a lot, and I think it would also be difficult to make everyone benefit equally or even impossible.

[dothebeats]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

From your explanation I learned a lesson that solving a problem in one corner will also result in problems in other corners being resolved. Well this makes a lot of sense and I think that's how it's going to go. Both parties can benefit from each other on the one hand but on the one hand if one party is harmed then the other party can also be harmed. Although there are certain aspects that will benefit one party more. For example, if rich people open up a lot of jobs. But they give low wages to their workers. well in this angle only the rich benefit. Poor people will be a little disadvantaged because their work is not properly appreciated. But in general there are still benefits for both parties. Because the poor are also still helped even though the salary is not high which is not in accordance with their hard work.

This much is right, solving a problem for someone can indirectly affect another. However, it should be remembered that not all benefits and effects are equally distributed, much like your example. The reason for this is that you are not actively solving the problem of the other party it just so happens that both parties are correlated in some aspect that one is indirectly being touched on as you exclusively work on the others. Another example of this is solving the problem of the poor, specifically in terms of household problems, this may lead to a greater motivation and drive for them to work that pushes a good work performance, indirectly affected by this is the rich or the company the poor is working to have more customers, have better products, or good business data outcome. It may not cause such big change and effect for the rich but it still did something, it's just that the bigger benefit is centered on the poor whose problem was the one mainly being solved and the company was just related or connected to the effect for the poor.

[Sebas.tian]

The Rich doesn't need more help like the poor who is looking for way to get his or her daily bread to feed, I think I will prefer to solve the problem of the poor than the rich because it hard for you to help the poor to rise financially and he or she will forget about the help in the future. The Rich has all his want and even though he doesn't have all he wants, I think he can use money to get all he wants to live a good life because he has the resources to solve his problem at anytime.when you solve the problem of the poor in an environment, it make you popular in that particular environment because the poor people you solve their problems will keep spreading the information in a way it will be giving you joy.

[khiholangkang]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

From your explanation I learned a lesson that solving a problem in one corner will also result in problems in other corners being resolved. Well this makes a lot of sense and I think that's how it's going to go. Both parties can benefit from each other on the one hand but on the one hand if one party is harmed then the other party can also be harmed. Although there are certain aspects that will benefit one party more. For example, if rich people open up a lot of jobs. But they give low wages to their workers. well in this angle only the rich benefit. Poor people will be a little disadvantaged because their work is not properly appreciated. But in general there are still benefits for both parties. Because the poor are also still helped even though the salary is not high which is not in accordance with their hard work.

This much is right, solving a problem for someone can indirectly affect another. However, it should be remembered that not all benefits and effects are equally distributed, much like your example. The reason for this is that you are not actively solving the problem of the other party it just so happens that both parties are correlated in some aspect that one is indirectly being touched on as you exclusively work on the others. Another example of this is solving the problem of the poor, specifically in terms of household problems, this may lead to a greater motivation and drive for them to work that pushes a good work performance, indirectly affected by this is the rich or the company the poor is working to have more customers, have better products, or good business data outcome. It may not cause such big change and effect for the rich but it still did something, it's just that the bigger benefit is centered on the poor whose problem was the one mainly being solved and the company was just related or connected to the effect for the poor.

According to natural law, when you get benefits, there must be something to lose in every atmosphere of life or in living ecosystems, even though we can see aspects of mutual benefit or in biology we call it symbiosis mutualism, and in fact, when viewed from the other side, there are things that are detrimental to one one party as well as between one human being and another human being.
We know that every business development for people who are rich or have capital aims to make a profit, and he needs other people's energy to achieve this because basically he cannot do it himself, and this creates several related interests between the rich and the poor for mutual benefit. In terms of salary, in my opinion, it is usually prepared according to regional standards which are adjusted to the job, if the poor do not get payment according to existing regulations then that is where the company does not respect its employees.

The Rich doesn't need more help like the poor who is looking for way to get his or her daily bread to feed, I think I will prefer to solve the problem of the poor than the rich because it hard for you to help the poor to rise financially and he or she will forget about the help in the future. The Rich has all his want and even though he doesn't have all he wants, I think he can use money to get all he wants to live a good life because he has the resources to solve his problem at anytime.when you solve the problem of the poor in an environment, it make you popular in that particular environment because the poor people you solve their problems will keep spreading the information in a way it will be giving you joy.

But you can't do that directly. You give money to them to improve the lives of the poor, right? it may be valid for a few days after they receive the money.LOL
This requires a management system on how to help them in the long term, provide them with skills and make their jobs much more effective, and keep in mind that it needs to have a lot of people to be well coordinated and conceptualized.

Unless you really just want to be remembered for giving them money.

[|MINER|]

Problems exist in the lives of both the rich and the poor.  Just as the rich have many problems, the poor also have many problems. But there are people from many sectors to solve the problems of the rich.  And the biggest thing is that the rich have money to solve their problems.  And to solve the problems of the poor, there is no money, no people. Even they do not understand how to solve their problems.  The poor have economic problems, problems of meeting basic needs, problems of food, education, medical problems.  According to my opinion we all should come forward to solve the problems of the poor.

[Ahli38]

We know that people varies in terms of their needs and how urgent they appear to them, we can also consider this that apparently everyone has one or two challenges that they needs solution to in what they do, we can also finds many other means of getting other people's needs solved when we see that ours can still be managed up over time without us being affected, we need to realize that life itself has many challenges and people's needs are never ending, the more we solve one the more others are coming after each other.

So true. That is a reality that we must be aware of. Every time we solve one problem, another problem will arise. But in problem solving there are indeed many factors that must be considered to decide which problem should be fixed first. And so it is in fixing the problems that the rich and the poor have. I personally would probably start with myself. And after the problem itself is fixed. Only then will I start to help fix the problems of the people closest to me. It doesn't matter if it's poor or rich.

How would you be able to fix other problems if even yourself is already broke? You have a point, and again, most of those businessmen have done it before, like they've already tried it on themselves or on their relatives, like helping other people.
 
We should also make sure that solving other problems can also solve them for you, meaning if you are releasing some products or services to them, they should work on you or on your relatives so that you can be sure that they are working.

Yes, that's right, friend. In solving problems, we are also required to look at the future impacts. Is that a good impact or otherwise? We really have to make sure that solving these problems can also benefit us too. In essence, we must try to create balance in the problem solving process. Don't let other people's problems be solved but have a bad impact on ourselves. This should be avoided. We must solve every problem by bringing benefits to all parties. Well, this is not easy and basically there are no easy problems to solve. Everything requires hard work. Rich people sometimes create solutions for their own businesses but this also has an impact on solving the problems of poor people. Like rich people who open new factory branches and absorb more workers from people who need work. Yes, there are steps to create a solution that solves the problem of both parties at once.

[GbitG]

Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

Definitely, I will pick up both the poor and the rich to assist in problem solving. From the perspective of human dignity, helping or solving problems is an obligation for every human. But if this problem solving or help means economic stability, then, according to my opinion, the poor have more rights than the rich to get in. Because rich guys could handle all the problems by themselves, they don't have too many problems. I think problems are only caused by health and family. Poor people have to face one crucial thing: money, which they don't have. I believe that money could possibly solve their problems. which problems are food, cloth, and house. But if we look at it from another perspective, which is government authority, there is no doubt about it. Everyone knows that all the problems are legitimate with one guy, which is the rich guy, because helping the rich guy is helping all the poor people.

[Sexylizzy2813]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

[Tamaperdana]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members.

Solving problems between poor people and rich people is actually a problem that can be solved all at once, or simultaneously. A simple example, a rich person who creates a large company or factory and the factory really has good potential. That way, the company or factory will definitely need employees to be able to run the factory. So that way, rich people and poor people can solve their problems. In plant science, this is called mutualistic symbiosis, which means mutual benefit to each other.

So solving the problems of rich people can indeed solve the problems of poor people. Because life always goes hand in hand, just as there are rich people, there are certainly poor people around them.
So solving the problems of poor people and rich people, in my opinion, can be done simultaneously.

[MarissaLopez]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Looking at this i believe you can solve the problem of the rich and as well the poor.
It just start with giving ear to both parties and knowing what the problem is.

Necessarily the rich might be rich and still be having issues that is giving them nightmares and you know that by knowing what their inner issues is and giving them audience will also pave a way to solving the problem of the poor..

Let me share you this short story:.There was a day A rich man and a poor man found themselves in church asking God for help and in solving their problem.
The poor man was so loud and violent in his prayer while the rich man was just Soft spoken and communicating with God like a business partner..
With the poor man loud violent prayers the rich man was distracted and looked at the poor man praying with so much anger in his request for money.
So then,to the rich man,the poor man is a disturbing is business tete a tete with God,so he sat back,put his hand in his pocket and brought out money the poor man is asking God for and gave to him right there..
The poor man was so happy and at that moment was thanking God for the blessings. So the rich man by reaching out to the needy poor man his business alignment with God was approved,and both was at balance and Thanking God.

Whats the lesson here now,From what the rich have,you can solve the problem of the poor and also the rich,so your duty is to be a problem solver to both parties and its done by asking and knowing what each of them want like in the story now God was the third party asking to know what they wants,the poor said said what he want and so is the rich man,and then God use the rich man to give the poor man what he desires and blessed the rich man for what he did..for me like ill solve the both problems.
Lets look at it that way all men are all equal.

[SmartCharpa]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Even though many poor people have different problems, there are some who have financial difficulties that you can help with jobs or other work that can be able to provide food to there table, because if you can't help them with jobs or other work that can be able to provide them with food to their table, then you won't be able to satisfy their needs.If that is difficult, there is no way we can be able to solve a poor situation. In fact, some people can see you as an enemy for not providing the solution to them.

According to my point of view, the only way to satisfy many poor individuals is to provide for their basic needs, such as providing for a community's lack of water, if someone with money is able to do so.

[xSkylarx]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

In short, manpower, poor people do the dirty work, but the rich work with their brains and their money, which is why they earn more. No matter what it is connected to, poor people can't also buy their needs if they haven't been employed by those rich people, and rich people can't earn a single profit without the manpower that is coming from poor people.
Let's say you purchased a share from the company of Elon, which only the rich can afford. If the company is successful, the rich also gain more profit, and guess what? Those employees received an increase. No, the managerial people or supervisors received the raise, not those below who keep their hands dirty and just take orders from above.

[Sexylizzy2813]

In short, manpower, poor people do the dirty work, but the rich work with their brains and their money, which is why they earn more. No matter what it is connected to, poor people can't also buy their needs if they haven't been employed by those rich people, and rich people can't earn a single profit without the manpower that is coming from poor people.
Let's say you purchased a share from the company of Elon, which only the rich can afford. If the company is successful, the rich also gain more profit, and guess what? Those employees received an increase. No, the managerial people or supervisors received the raise, not those below who keep their hands dirty and just take orders from above.

That's true and without the poor the rich can't get a successful business so in as much as the rich just sit and get more money it only shows that the poor at least have something to hold on to with their pay they can't depend on street begging, at the moment there problem have been solved.
The rich only need the poor as in manpower to make more money, without the manpower that business will crumble even if it's Elon musk.

[Crypto Library]

Problems exist in everyone's life. Both the rich and the poor are facing various problems. There is no person in the world without problems. But we think that the life of the rich is easy and the life of the poor is difficult. This is our misconception.  Because there are many big problems in the life of the rich, such as job loss, business loss, financial loss, high expenses for physical problems.  And their losses are very high.
 There were many rich people who were just sitting on the path to loss in business because their losses were so great that no one could afford to help them.  And rich people cannot ask everyone for help when they are in trouble.  However, if we consider the problems, the amount of problems in the life of the poor is not less. They are also plagued with various problems.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

When you solve a problem it either benefits the rich or the poor. Job creation benefits the poor more than the rich. However when the government gives people like Elon Musk the permission to build a gigantic Tesla Battery manufacturing factory in Texas, it benefits the rich because they would buy more shares in the company, making it more profitable, also he doesn't get to pay taxes. It also benefits the poor because of massive job creation.

Lastly, the problem of the poor soon becomes that of the rich if it is not solved.

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

We should always have it at the back of our minds that the rich and the poor both are interdependent of each other, in an economy, everyone cannot be rich and also not everyone will be poor as well, this has always been and will remain forever because we all cannot reason exist in the same category, but live renders us opportunities to have a chance of changing from one class to another, the poor are aiming to get rich while the rich are doing what it takes to make wealth, the whole summary now is if the poor is not doing what will make him rich, he may never get wealth, if the rich does it maintain a practice to sustain his wealth, he will become poor, those that have witnessed the two can explain better.

[Altryist]

Problems exist in everyone's life. Both the rich and the poor are facing various problems. There is no person in the world without problems. But we think that the life of the rich is easy and the life of the poor is difficult. This is our misconception.  Because there are many big problems in the life of the rich, such as job loss, business loss, financial loss, high expenses for physical problems.  And their losses are very high.
 There were many rich people who were just sitting on the path to loss in business because their losses were so great that no one could afford to help them.  And rich people cannot ask everyone for help when they are in trouble.  However, if we consider the problems, the amount of problems in the life of the poor is not less. They are also plagued with various problems.

One of the problems a person always has is either too little money or too much money. Which one would you like to have? It is clear that when you are rich, most problems can be solved by money, and your task will be to skillfully manage your wealth. When there is no money, many problems arise that will constantly distract us, this is a very difficult situation from which it is difficult to get out. It's better to worry about where to invest money than about where to find money to eat.

[livingfree]

That's true and without the poor the rich can't get a successful business so in as much as the rich just sit and get more money it only shows that the poor at least have something to hold on to with their pay they can't depend on street begging, at the moment there problem have been solved.
The rich only need the poor as in manpower to make more money, without the manpower that business will crumble even if it's Elon musk.

Well, just as the poor and describing them as if they're slaves which is a sad truth. We're all consumers and even the richest folks are also consumers.

So, they also make others rich and while the others are also making them rich. What could possibly be the problem of the rich? I guess if they're problematic about time management, someone has to step in to them and don't need to teach them but buy them some time on how they'll be entertained.

Because only them can handle their own problems.

[n0ne]

Majority state that they'll try to solve the problem of the poor. The reality, we need to make the rich understand the difficulties faced by the poor. Most of the billionaires have emerged from poor background. They know well about the poor peoples life. The rich gets richer through their hardwork, we can't deny it. Same time there needs to certain restrictions with the limits, beyond the limit should be shared to the people in need. Such scenario could be the only way to solve the problem of the poor.

[awik p]

That's true and without the poor the rich can't get a successful business so in as much as the rich just sit and get more money it only shows that the poor at least have something to hold on to with their pay they can't depend on street begging, at the moment there problem have been solved.
The rich only need the poor as in manpower to make more money, without the manpower that business will crumble even if it's Elon musk.

Well, just as the poor and describing them as if they're slaves which is a sad truth. We're all consumers and even the richest folks are also consumers.

So, they also make others rich and while the others are also making them rich. What could possibly be the problem of the rich? I guess if they're problematic about time management, someone has to step in to them and don't need to teach them but buy them some time on how they'll be entertained.

Because only them can handle their own problems.

It seems like it is a natural law that humans need each other and cannot live alone. Therefore, don't be disappointed about being poor because we can work with rich people and learn how they work, so we have the opportunity to become rich too. and rich people must be able to respect poor people, because after all we need their energy to achieve income that continues to be created. therefore mutual respect will make everyone feel happy with their lives

[livingfree]

Well, just as the poor and describing them as if they're slaves which is a sad truth. We're all consumers and even the richest folks are also consumers.

So, they also make others rich and while the others are also making them rich. What could possibly be the problem of the rich? I guess if they're problematic about time management, someone has to step in to them and don't need to teach them but buy them some time on how they'll be entertained.

Because only them can handle their own problems.

It seems like it is a natural law that humans need each other and cannot live alone. Therefore, don't be disappointed about being poor because we can work with rich people and learn how they work, so we have the opportunity to become rich too.

We have to adapt the situation and learn from it. There were real poor people that came from there and then learned the process, got the knowledge and became rich as they took the risk and applied what they've learned from the rich.

and rich people must be able to respect poor people, because after all we need their energy to achieve income that continues to be created. therefore mutual respect will make everyone feel happy with their lives

While I know that many rich people don't degrade people that are not on their level. But it's also another sad truth that there are people that have just became rich and yet, belittling people that are not quite well with their lives.

[G_Besar]

It seems like it is a natural law that humans need each other and cannot live alone. Therefore, don't be disappointed about being poor because we can work with rich people and learn how they work, so we have the opportunity to become rich too. and rich people must be able to respect poor people, because after all we need their energy to achieve income that continues to be created. therefore mutual respect will make everyone feel happy with their lives

It is more of a law for the life of every human being on this earth, because the attitude of mutual respect and respect for each other is part of the etiquette in life. So that the need for each other between rich people and poor people can happen well because basically rich people will not be able to do all the work by themselves if they don't rely on the labor of poor people or rely on the intelligence of poor people.

Poor people have the opportunity to become rich because they work for rich people with a very decent salary, but poor people who only work for their daily needs will take a long time to become rich because they do not have enough income to make savings in their lives. So in this case it is very clear that poor people really need rich people so that they can become rich one day, apart from their labor being needed by rich people who have more places to employ poor people.

[hafiztalha]

Rich and poor people have their own problems according to their own portions. If they choose me to hear their problems, of course I welcome. But won't provide any solution if it doesn't suit my knowledge and experience preference. I just don't want to add more problems because of wrong advice, and I don't want to become another corner of the problem.

Yes, I will solve the problem of poor people. Poor people do not have financial knowledge, so I will give them free financial education, I will taught  a highly paid skills, in this they will get out from poverty and they will work to enjoy life. Poor people only spend their life to serve a rich people, they work for money and money do not work for them. This is a big difference between rich a nd poor people. I will teach them to stand on their feet, I will them how to start any business and how to make a progress report. I will teach them, how to make a connection with people and how to marketing. Firstly, I will teach them marketing because marketing has a high scope. Every businessman should know marketing. They will be stand on their feet in 1 year and they will be rich in 3 years and then money will work for them, they will not do work for money. I this way, we can change our country fate.

[Mame89]

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

Yes, that's right, both of them are actually tied to each other to achieve their goals. As you have said, they need each other even to achieve their respective goals. Because without complementing each other, the goals they want will be difficult to achieve. However, rich people and poor people have the same thing in common, namely that they both have big egos, because they both feel that their rights must come first, and in the end their faces are the same.

So back to the OP's thread, if I could choose who I should help first, I would choose to prioritize helping the poor. because I believe rich people will remain rich even without help, they will remain financially safe. This is very different from poor people, if they are not helped then their difficulties will increase. Whether we admit it or not, in many countries the number of poor people is definitely the largest. It could be said that there are more poor people than rich people. So by helping poor people, life in the country will also be safer and more stable because in some countries crime has increased due to the large number of poor people.

[CODE200]

Rich and poor people have their own problems according to their own portions. If they choose me to hear their problems, of course I welcome. But won't provide any solution if it doesn't suit my knowledge and experience preference. I just don't want to add more problems because of wrong advice, and I don't want to become another corner of the problem.

Yes, I will solve the problem of poor people. Poor people do not have financial knowledge, so I will give them free financial education, I will taught  a highly paid skills, in this they will get out from poverty and they will work to enjoy life. Poor people only spend their life to serve a rich people, they work for money and money do not work for them. This is a big difference between rich a nd poor people. I will teach them to stand on their feet, I will them how to start any business and how to make a progress report. I will teach them, how to make a connection with people and how to marketing. Firstly, I will teach them marketing because marketing has a high scope. Every businessman should know marketing. They will be stand on their feet in 1 year and they will be rich in 3 years and then money will work for them, they will not do work for money. I this way, we can change our country fate.

I would probably do the same, I think poor people needs more help compare to the rich ones. Of course, the first step that must be done is to make education more accessible for the people who cannot afford it, because lack of education is the main root why there are a lot of poverty-stricken people. Teaching them financial literacy will help them to developed wise spending and budgeting, this will aid them to achieve financial stability.

Others may argue that poverty is a choice, but sometimes even the most hardworking person is still living in a poverty because of poor salaries and income. Let's try to look at the farmers, they are working very hard amidst strong climates, and yet most of them are still considered poor because their income is not enough compare to the amount of work that they do. For example, in my country, a farmer only gets 5 dollars per day which is not enough to survive a day. So, this is something that I would like to solve because I believe that proper wages should be given to them.

[Fakhrulenclix]

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

Yes, that's right, both of them are actually tied to each other to achieve their goals. As you have said, they need each other even to achieve their respective goals. Because without complementing each other, the goals they want will be difficult to achieve. However, rich people and poor people have the same thing in common, namely that they both have big egos, because they both feel that their rights must come first, and in the end their faces are the same.

So back to the OP's thread, if I could choose who I should help first, I would choose to prioritize helping the poor. because I believe rich people will remain rich even without help, they will remain financially safe. This is very different from poor people, if they are not helped then their difficulties will increase. Whether we admit it or not, in many countries the number of poor people is definitely the largest. It could be said that there are more poor people than rich people. So by helping poor people, life in the country will also be safer and more stable because in some countries crime has increased due to the large number of poor people.

All humans need each other, in fact, no one can do it alone, between poor people and rich people there is a continuity of mutual assistance and it cannot be separated.
And regarding which one will be helped first, of course everyone will help solve problems for the people who need it, for rich people who have excess finances they can get out of problems by using the financial strength they have, while poor people can't, so it's clear that poor people are given priority.

[summonerrk]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

I don't understand what the "problem of the rich" is. As a rule, the rich are people who have achieved what they have with their hard work. They invented or invented something, in general they were useful to society. Yes, thieves and murderers often get rich, but there are a minority of them. Therefore, I think we should not solve only the problem of poverty, because such people suffer from a lack of food and medicines. And the rich are the kind of population that we cannot influence. And why?

[Ayers]

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

Yes, that's right, both of them are actually tied to each other to achieve their goals. As you have said, they need each other even to achieve their respective goals. Because without complementing each other, the goals they want will be difficult to achieve. However, rich people and poor people have the same thing in common, namely that they both have big egos, because they both feel that their rights must come first, and in the end their faces are the same.

So back to the OP's thread, if I could choose who I should help first, I would choose to prioritize helping the poor. because I believe rich people will remain rich even without help, they will remain financially safe. This is very different from poor people, if they are not helped then their difficulties will increase. Whether we admit it or not, in many countries the number of poor people is definitely the largest. It could be said that there are more poor people than rich people. So by helping poor people, life in the country will also be safer and more stable because in some countries crime has increased due to the large number of poor people.

All humans need each other, in fact, no one can do it alone, between poor people and rich people there is a continuity of mutual assistance and it cannot be separated.
And regarding which one will be helped first, of course everyone will help solve problems for the people who need it, for rich people who have excess finances they can get out of problems by using the financial strength they have, while poor people can't, so it's clear that poor people are given priority.

The problem here is that the OP's question is about solving the problem, not who we choose to support. The rich and the poor are inextricably linked and the two are almost inseparable if they want to survive. And the problem of the poor is largely economic and to be able to solve that requires rich people, because the rich are the ones who are building businesses and creating jobs. From there, it helps the poor solve the problems of the poor. So if we choose to solve problems, we only need to solve the rich people's problems and the poor people's problems will also be solved.
Just as the government wants to improve people's lives, what they need to do is promote businesses to expand production, create more jobs and the poor will be helped through that.

[slapper]

It seems like it is a natural law that humans need each other and cannot live alone. Therefore, don't be disappointed about being poor because we can work with rich people and learn how they work, so we have the opportunity to become rich too. and rich people must be able to respect poor people, because after all we need their energy to achieve income that continues to be created. therefore mutual respect will make everyone feel happy with their lives

It is more of a law for the life of every human being on this earth, because the attitude of mutual respect and respect for each other is part of the etiquette in life. So that the need for each other between rich people and poor people can happen well because basically rich people will not be able to do all the work by themselves if they don't rely on the labor of poor people or rely on the intelligence of poor people.

Poor people have the opportunity to become rich because they work for rich people with a very decent salary, but poor people who only work for their daily needs will take a long time to become rich because they do not have enough income to make savings in their lives. So in this case it is very clear that poor people really need rich people so that they can become rich one day, apart from their labor being needed by rich people who have more places to employ poor people.

The symbiotic relationship between the "haves" and the "have-nots" is a fundamental component of the modern economy. Isn't that a cycle? Rich people require skilled, often impoverished labor. Then, poor people look to the rich and their businesses for opportunity. Still, isn't it a little simplistic to say that the only way for the poor to become prosperous is to work for the wealthy? Modern economics are shifting. Online platforms, companies, and the digital era provide opportunities for people to move up the economic ladder without relying on traditional sources of income. Not all poor people work to sustain themselves. Many people invest in small businesses, education, and talents. Although this complex socioeconomic web is interdependent, it is not everyone's path to wealth

[dothebeats]

It seems like it is a natural law that humans need each other and cannot live alone. Therefore, don't be disappointed about being poor because we can work with rich people and learn how they work, so we have the opportunity to become rich too. and rich people must be able to respect poor people, because after all we need their energy to achieve income that continues to be created. therefore mutual respect will make everyone feel happy with their lives

It is more of a law for the life of every human being on this earth, because the attitude of mutual respect and respect for each other is part of the etiquette in life. So that the need for each other between rich people and poor people can happen well because basically rich people will not be able to do all the work by themselves if they don't rely on the labor of poor people or rely on the intelligence of poor people.

Poor people have the opportunity to become rich because they work for rich people with a very decent salary, but poor people who only work for their daily needs will take a long time to become rich because they do not have enough income to make savings in their lives. So in this case it is very clear that poor people really need rich people so that they can become rich one day, apart from their labor being needed by rich people who have more places to employ poor people.

The symbiotic relationship between the "haves" and the "have-nots" is a fundamental component of the modern economy. Isn't that a cycle? Rich people require skilled, often impoverished labor. Then, poor people look to the rich and their businesses for opportunity. Still, isn't it a little simplistic to say that the only way for the poor to become prosperous is to work for the wealthy? Modern economics are shifting. Online platforms, companies, and the digital era provide opportunities for people to move up the economic ladder without relying on traditional sources of income. Not all poor people work to sustain themselves. Many people invest in small businesses, education, and talents. Although this complex socioeconomic web is interdependent, it is not everyone's path to wealth

I agree with you. Times are changing and the more that the world develops and adapts innovative changes the more human beings find ways to survive without solely relying on each other (at least in a traditional aspect). Despite the already proven cycle of how the poor look at the rich for job opportunities to gain sources of income, other ways of earning have been introduced. Online platforms have given a stage for anyone to have a space to enrich their skills and knowledge that opens various pathways for both poor and rich to grab any opportunity to earn. Moreover, stories of the poor finding ways to reach an outstanding level of wealth without relying on their jobs under rich people (like building their own business, which they started from scratch) can be seen on news and various platforms more and more these days.

[Peanutswar]

If you expect a lot of profit then fixing the problems of the rich is the most appropriate thing to do. But that doesn't mean we don't care about the problems experienced by poor people. Because our goal is to make more money so we can build a strong economy that can help the problems of the poor in the end.

We profit from the rich and we use the profits we get to help solve the problems that the poor have. Well, because at this time every problem solving must be supported by strong finances. So our main focus is to build strong finances before solving the problems of the grassroots. We can start by solving the problems of the rich and then move on to solving the problems of the poor.

Rich people manage their money properly and know whats the concept really needed to make their money grow and just makes a repeating cycle and also one of the very important thing that most of the people always didn't notice is when the rich people have a good circle of friend or networks they can easily exchange ideas, gain more connection and makes a collaboration so their networth makes more bigger and bigger, reason why better to choose the people around you if you want to succeed too in life.

[carlisle1]

Is just that without the poor the rich can't completely achieve their goal, because if you look at it this way like you said there would be massive job creation. With that you don't expect the rich after buying shares they should still be the ones to engage in both the laboring department, no. That's why I said without the poor the rich finds it hard to get to their goal.

Yes, that's right, both of them are actually tied to each other to achieve their goals. As you have said, they need each other even to achieve their respective goals. Because without complementing each other, the goals they want will be difficult to achieve. However, rich people and poor people have the same thing in common, namely that they both have big egos, because they both feel that their rights must come first, and in the end their faces are the same.

So back to the OP's thread, if I could choose who I should help first, I would choose to prioritize helping the poor. because I believe rich people will remain rich even without help, they will remain financially safe. This is very different from poor people, if they are not helped then their difficulties will increase. Whether we admit it or not, in many countries the number of poor people is definitely the largest. It could be said that there are more poor people than rich people. So by helping poor people, life in the country will also be safer and more stable because in some countries crime has increased due to the large number of poor people.

All humans need each other, in fact, no one can do it alone, between poor people and rich people there is a continuity of mutual assistance and it cannot be separated.
And regarding which one will be helped first, of course everyone will help solve problems for the people who need it, for rich people who have excess finances they can get out of problems by using the financial strength they have, while poor people can't, so it's clear that poor people are given priority.

If there's good human affection, rich people who will continue to be rich can help a lot in terms of providing aid for poor people,
I mean, the more they are getting richer, the better opportunity that they can provide.

But I hate to say about my observation, greed conquer humanity so instead of helping they will just continue to claim their fortune and forget
about helping.

Domino effect is better to achieve this kind of situation and you won't be left in between, as there are continuous movements.

[Uruhara]

If you expect a lot of profit then fixing the problems of the rich is the most appropriate thing to do. But that doesn't mean we don't care about the problems experienced by poor people. Because our goal is to make more money so we can build a strong economy that can help the problems of the poor in the end.

We profit from the rich and we use the profits we get to help solve the problems that the poor have. Well, because at this time every problem solving must be supported by strong finances. So our main focus is to build strong finances before solving the problems of the grassroots. We can start by solving the problems of the rich and then move on to solving the problems of the poor.

Rich people manage their money properly and know whats the concept really needed to make their money grow and just makes a repeating cycle and also one of the very important thing that most of the people always didn't notice is when the rich people have a good circle of friend or networks they can easily exchange ideas, gain more connection and makes a collaboration so their networth makes more bigger and bigger, reason why better to choose the people around you if you want to succeed too in life.

So true. if we often chat with those who already have financial freedom or with rich people. Sometimes we can always learn a lot from their views in terms of financial management and good business practices. And actually rich people are also very instrumental in helping the problems of poor people. For example, when the government is unable to provide jobs for poor people. So the rich people stood at the front and opened vacancies for many small people. In various types of work from the heaviest to the lightest. Depends on the education and skills possessed by the lower class people who apply. So becoming rich is a solution for us to help the problems of poor people.

[boty]

So true. if we often chat with those who already have financial freedom or with rich people. Sometimes we can always learn a lot from their views in terms of financial management and good business practices. And actually rich people are also very instrumental in helping the problems of poor people. For example, when the government is unable to provide jobs for poor people. So the rich people stood at the front and opened vacancies for many small people. In various types of work from the heaviest to the lightest. Depends on the education and skills possessed by the lower class people who apply. So becoming rich is a solution for us to help the problems of poor people.

There are many things we can learn from hanging out with successful people, but this really depends on their personality. Some people who have achieved success will have very little time to sit with poor people and we can only see how that person manages their wealth them so that we can do as they do.
As financially successful people, of course they need other people to be able to work for them and this really helps the government in reducing unemployment around them. I really agree with you if we become rich as a solution to be able to help other people and don't be someone else rich who only use other people to work for him by not paying salaries according to what other people have done.

[Xcode7]

So true. if we often chat with those who already have financial freedom or with rich people. Sometimes we can always learn a lot from their views in terms of financial management and good business practices. And actually rich people are also very instrumental in helping the problems of poor people. For example, when the government is unable to provide jobs for poor people. So the rich people stood at the front and opened vacancies for many small people. In various types of work from the heaviest to the lightest. Depends on the education and skills possessed by the lower class people who apply. So becoming rich is a solution for us to help the problems of poor people.

There are many things we can learn from hanging out with successful people, but this really depends on their personality. Some people who have achieved success will have very little time to sit with poor people and we can only see how that person manages their wealth them so that we can do as they do.
As financially successful people, of course they need other people to be able to work for them and this really helps the government in reducing unemployment around them. I really agree with you if we become rich as a solution to be able to help other people and don't be someone else rich who only use other people to work for him by not paying salaries according to what other people have done.

To be able to help other people, you don't need to be rich first, there are many things we can do to help other people physically and mentally.
Currently, many people join or join humanitarian volunteers and help with many things without needing to spend money, just with their energy and thoughts, because many people also need help, not financial, it can be help from energy or knowledge.

It is true that there are many positive things that we can get from rich people and one of the widespread benefits of hanging out with rich people is the opening of relationships that will be mutually beneficial.

[Uruhara]

So true. if we often chat with those who already have financial freedom or with rich people. Sometimes we can always learn a lot from their views in terms of financial management and good business practices. And actually rich people are also very instrumental in helping the problems of poor people. For example, when the government is unable to provide jobs for poor people. So the rich people stood at the front and opened vacancies for many small people. In various types of work from the heaviest to the lightest. Depends on the education and skills possessed by the lower class people who apply. So becoming rich is a solution for us to help the problems of poor people.

There are many things we can learn from hanging out with successful people, but this really depends on their personality. Some people who have achieved success will have very little time to sit with poor people and we can only see how that person manages their wealth them so that we can do as they do.
As financially successful people, of course they need other people to be able to work for them and this really helps the government in reducing unemployment around them. I really agree with you if we become rich as a solution to be able to help other people and don't be someone else rich who only use other people to work for him by not paying salaries according to what other people have done.

To be able to help other people, you don't need to be rich first, there are many things we can do to help other people physically and mentally.
Currently, many people join or join humanitarian volunteers and help with many things without needing to spend money, just with their energy and thoughts, because many people also need help, not financial, it can be help from energy or knowledge.

It is true that there are many positive things that we can get from rich people and one of the widespread benefits of hanging out with rich people is the opening of relationships that will be mutually beneficial.

I also agree that to help other people we can do it in many ways. Either with knowledge or other services without having to become rich. But to help more people, other things are needed, such as strong finances. Like building schools in the interior where there are no school buildings. However, to help poor people we don't have to wait to become rich first. Well, we can help starting with the small things.
But we must also have high aspirations, namely to become rich and provide more jobs and pay the employees we have with wages that are more appropriate than those offered by other companies.

Talking to rich people can indeed grow our insight regarding financial management and can also increase our motivation to work harder. But talking to poor people has just as much benefit. Namely, we will get a very expensive insight into how they live a simple life but still smile and be happy. Honestly, I mostly see children on the streets who are very cheerful and they live like they are full of freedom. And the looks on their faces show signs that they are enjoying their lives sincerely even though they are full of financial shortcomings. In essence, we can learn to be grateful to poor people. And we can also learn to survive in difficult situations from them.
The point is that rich people and poor people have positive things that we can learn from. But in both there are also negative things that we should not imitate.

[Bitcoin_people]

Both the rich and the poor have their own problems to solve. I have seen that if a rich person faces any problem, he can overcome that problem with the wealth he has. But a poor person can never overcome his own problems with money or wealth, because he has no money and wealth. Moreover, rich people have problems and poor people also have problems, basically rich people can deal with problems and their problems are easily solved. But poor people have to put in a lot of effort and trouble to deal with their problems while they stumble a lot in solving those problems. The ratio of problems between rich and poor is the same but rich people can easily deal with the problem, but it is different for the poor poor which they can easily do and have to face many kinds of dangers to deal with the problem.

[Out of mind]

✂️

The rich and the poor all have their own basic problems that they personally try to solve in order to defend them. Most of the problems faced by the rich are their wealth and in various commercial fields they face many kinds of problems, and they need a lot of money to solve them, and they can solve them easily. But when a poor person faces a problem, it takes a long time to overcome it. But whether a person is rich or poor, their problem must require crime, and if they do not commit crime, they are never in trouble, so I cannot take sides without good judgment. I think that a rich man can solve his problem easily, but a poor man can never solve his problem easily, but after going through a lot of trouble he can solve his problem.

[Dobabe]

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2023/08/22/MIQO8.jpeg

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Even though many poor people have different problems, there are some who have financial difficulties that you can help with jobs or other work that can be able to provide food to there table, because if you can't help them with jobs or other work that can be able to provide them with food to their table, then you won't be able to satisfy their needs.If that is difficult, there is no way we can be able to solve a poor situation. In fact, some people can see you as an enemy for not providing the solution to them.

According to my point of view, the only way to satisfy many poor individuals is to provide for their basic needs, such as providing for a community's lack of water, if someone with money is able to do so.

I will choose to help the poor. The truth is there's nothing wrong with being wealthy but a rich man sees money as an opportunity while the poor see it as something to be earned. Helping the poor and needy people is crucial to build the society, for example if every rich individual can help the poor with job opportunity and providing their needs I don't think poverty rate will be high in our society. And also I don't think a rich man will ask for money, rather a rich man will ask for something precious and valuable maybe an external life or beyond and nobody can afford something beyond

[superman184]

I will choose to help the poor. The truth is there's nothing wrong with being wealthy but a rich man sees money as an opportunity while the poor see it as something to be earned. Helping the poor and needy people is crucial to build the society, for example if every rich individual can help the poor with job opportunity and providing their needs I don't think poverty rate will be high in our society. And also I don't think a rich man will ask for money, rather a rich man will ask for something precious and valuable maybe an external life or beyond and nobody can afford something beyond

Assistance must be aimed at people who need it and in this case it is poor people because most poor people always have problems with their finances and economy in life. Meanwhile, rich people are people who don't have any problems with that except for their own thoughts, who may have to keep thinking about how to maintain the assets they have well enough and also think about being able to continue running the business they have built during their lifetime.

It is true that if all rich people were willing to provide job vacancies for poor people in this world, there would not be more people in trouble in this world even though those who have worked would not immediately become rich. But at least they can continue to be independent with income from their work, but every rich person who wants to employ poor people in the company or factory they own will always make special criteria for each person. So not all poor people can be helped by this when recruiting employees for companies or factories owned by rich people.

[asyakashi]

if it concerns rich and poor I think it would be a long way of saying we are humane if we help poor people. even if someone is rich in trouble. what did they experience? Usually rich people have difficulties that are not of general concern and of course they have to look for experts. such as if they are suffering from an illness. different from poor people who most people should be able to help. I'm sure if we help them just $1 it will be very beneficial for them. at least it allows them to eat at that time.

[bettercrypto]

if it concerns rich and poor I think it would be a long way of saying we are humane if we help poor people. even if someone is rich in trouble. what did they experience? Usually rich people have difficulties that are not of general concern and of course they have to look for experts. such as if they are suffering from an illness. different from poor people who most people should be able to help. I'm sure if we help them just $1 it will be very beneficial for them. at least it allows them to eat at that time.

I think helping doesn't discriminate whether the person is rich or poor. As long as you can help, that is what we will provide. Because there are times when the poor help rich people they don't know, or even the middle class, or even the poor.

The same is true of other rich people; there are those who are helped who are poor people, and they are also rich in the state of our country. Usually the rich help because they have a lot of money; the poor often help based on their skills and unique possessions that rich people don't have.

[IvugeoEvolutionCoin]

I will choose to help the poor. The truth is there's nothing wrong with being wealthy but a rich man sees money as an opportunity while the poor see it as something to be earned. Helping the poor and needy people is crucial to build the society, for example if every rich individual can help the poor with job opportunity and providing their needs I don't think poverty rate will be high in our society. And also I don't think a rich man will ask for money, rather a rich man will ask for something precious and valuable maybe an external life or beyond and nobody can afford something beyond

There are many rich people in our society but not all of them are interested in helping the poor people because of which the poor people in our society are facing many problems. If the rich people in our society are with the poor people then our society will improve a lot in a very short time. And  No poor people will stay in our society. We can help the poor people in our society if we want to, but it requires the help of all of us.

[Dimitri94]

If you expect a lot of profit then fixing the problems of the rich is the most appropriate thing to do. But that doesn't mean we don't care about the problems experienced by poor people. Because our goal is to make more money so we can build a strong economy that can help the problems of the poor in the end.

We profit from the rich and we use the profits we get to help solve the problems that the poor have. Well, because at this time every problem solving must be supported by strong finances. So our main focus is to build strong finances before solving the problems of the grassroots. We can start by solving the problems of the rich and then move on to solving the problems of the poor.

Rich people manage their money properly and know whats the concept really needed to make their money grow and just makes a repeating cycle and also one of the very important thing that most of the people always didn't notice is when the rich people have a good circle of friend or networks they can easily exchange ideas, gain more connection and makes a collaboration so their networth makes more bigger and bigger, reason why better to choose the people around you if you want to succeed too in life.

So true. if we often chat with those who already have financial freedom or with rich people. Sometimes we can always learn a lot from their views in terms of financial management and good business practices. And actually rich people are also very instrumental in helping the problems of poor people. For example, when the government is unable to provide jobs for poor people. So the rich people stood at the front and opened vacancies for many small people. In various types of work from the heaviest to the lightest. Depends on the education and skills possessed by the lower class people who apply. So becoming rich is a solution for us to help the problems of poor people.

Government of a country is not able to give a job to an unemployed person and they must complete the recruitment process within the specified rules. Moreover, it is not possible to hire additional manpower in favor of the government. But a rich man can create any employment opportunity for a poor man if he wants which is not always possible by the Government. Poor people benefit from those who are rich. The rich and the poor complement each other but the poor are able to find employment because of the existence of the rich.

[Mate2237]

Solving the problem of one rich person can save thousands of jobs so it depends on who is that rich person and what is their problem.

If you see more replies that say to solve the problems of more poor people then its not a wonder because that is the right thing from an ethical Point of View.

You have made your point or view from the first sentence so there is no need to supporting the poor again. But as for me, I will solve the problems of the poor. Because if I solve the problems of the poor I will have freedom to move and the request from them will reduce, but if I solve the already rich people problem then I have not solve any problem in the world. I am in this world to solve the problem of the poor and not the rich. The rich have money to solve their problem so if I have money to solve problem, it is the poor.

According to a philosopher, Machiavelli, a leader that support and solve the problems of the poor is the true leader and not the one who support the oppressive Oligarchy. The leader that support the poor will have the freedom to do things than the leader that support the rich.   

[Y3shot]

I know that most people will rush towards solving problems for the poor people,  there are already so many persons and agencies  rendering help in that category. I will go towards solving problems for the rich, many persons do not bother to ask how these guys are faring, everyone feels they have money so they don't have any issue, lending a solution to a rich man will not only solve his problem but also make  me an asset. So I'll solve problems  for rich folks anytime any day

[Uruhara]

If you expect a lot of profit then fixing the problems of the rich is the most appropriate thing to do. But that doesn't mean we don't care about the problems experienced by poor people. Because our goal is to make more money so we can build a strong economy that can help the problems of the poor in the end.

We profit from the rich and we use the profits we get to help solve the problems that the poor have. Well, because at this time every problem solving must be supported by strong finances. So our main focus is to build strong finances before solving the problems of the grassroots. We can start by solving the problems of the rich and then move on to solving the problems of the poor.

Rich people manage their money properly and know whats the concept really needed to make their money grow and just makes a repeating cycle and also one of the very important thing that most of the people always didn't notice is when the rich people have a good circle of friend or networks they can easily exchange ideas, gain more connection and makes a collaboration so their networth makes more bigger and bigger, reason why better to choose the people around you if you want to succeed too in life.

So true. if we often chat with those who already have financial freedom or with rich people. Sometimes we can always learn a lot from their views in terms of financial management and good business practices. And actually rich people are also very instrumental in helping the problems of poor people. For example, when the government is unable to provide jobs for poor people. So the rich people stood at the front and opened vacancies for many small people. In various types of work from the heaviest to the lightest. Depends on the education and skills possessed by the lower class people who apply. So becoming rich is a solution for us to help the problems of poor people.

Government of a country is not able to give a job to an unemployed person and they must complete the recruitment process within the specified rules. Moreover, it is not possible to hire additional manpower in favor of the government. But a rich man can create any employment opportunity for a poor man if he wants which is not always possible by the Government. Poor people benefit from those who are rich. The rich and the poor complement each other but the poor are able to find employment because of the existence of the rich.

Yes, it's true that everything works quite harmoniously and complements each other. Because basically rich people need services from poor people's work and poor people also need wages by working for rich people. The government and the rich also work well together in this regard. Because to establish a company, government permission is required. And another thing is that rich people pay quite high taxes to the government. And the tax money is also useful for increasing state income to develop the country to become more advanced. and also to help people who need financial assistance. And I am happy because in my country, when difficulties occur, the government always provides assistance to the people. Even though it's not evenly distributed, I appreciate the effort.

[dothebeats]

I know that most people will rush towards solving problems for the poor people,  there are already so many persons and agencies  rendering help in that category. I will go towards solving problems for the rich, many persons do not bother to ask how these guys are faring, everyone feels they have money so they don't have any issue, lending a solution to a rich man will not only solve his problem but also make  me an asset. So I'll solve problems  for rich folks anytime any day

Good point here. People often think that being rich means having the best side of everything. What we tend to forget is that there are negative things that comes with bring rich like the responsibility that comes with it, how people seem to always watch your every move and decisions to judge you if you do something that doesn't fit their standards and expectations, and how sometimes it is hard to show emotions because people expect you to be cold and strong. Hence, I understand what you meant by helping the rich who needs help from things we often forget they might be dealing with just because they have the money.

[harapan]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Lovely topic. Both of them will make you good fortune and generational wealth in the process in you know what you want and how to get it done.

Solving the problems of the rich will make quickly, though I do not want to be involved with one who steals my ideas to implement on his own without acknowledge me.

There are so many poor people in the world, last time I checked, we have more poor people than rich people in the world.

Let's say I solve the problems of two billion people, I'll end up becoming rich. With a net worth in billions.
I've always wanted to solve and would love to solve the problems of the poor anyday anytime.

[dothebeats]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

Lovely topic. Both of them will make you good fortune and generational wealth in the process in you know what you want and how to get it done.

Solving the problems of the rich will make quickly, though I do not want to be involved with one who steals my ideas to implement on his own without acknowledge me.

There are so many poor people in the world, last time I checked, we have more poor people than rich people in the world.

Let's say I solve the problems of two billion people, I'll end up becoming rich. With a net worth in billions.
I've always wanted to solve and would love to solve the problems of the poor anyday anytime.

First of all, if you are seeking to get money from helping people then I suggest you help the rich as it will ultimately lead you to have a good network for your business or investments. Helping poor people on the other hand will require you to have your own money to give financial assistance to them, because let's be real here, most of the problem of the poor people is money related. Additionally, if we are being realistic here it is impossible to help two billion people unless you are rich or influential. Hence, if you really want to help the poor you have to be fully realistic and do not expect that you'll be making much fortune out of it.

[Fortify]

I came across this tweet, so the reference is the username. I thought it was a topic worth bringing up for discussion to see the choice that will be made by forum members. This topic is about solving problems as a service you render to make a living. Which of the problems will you prefer to solve as a service you render? the problems of the poor? or the problems of the rich? (support your choice with a reason)

I posted this here because it relates to choices we make concerning how we want our finance to be, if this is a wrong place and the topic fits better in "politics and society", I will be happy to move it there.

It's a dumb statement for a start. Firstly, rich people problems are nothing like the poorest and they usually revolve around legislation designed to regulate their activity for the better of everyone - which are not really problems at all. Nor is helping "poor" people necessarily a good thing, I'd love to help genuine people stuck in trouble but not people who willfully waste money. The best you can do is try to educate future generations how to wisely use money and how to get the best value education possible for them. University can be good, but I think they have maybe been a bit too commercialized because there are too many worthless courses out there that send the students into staggering debt without much opportunity to use them well.

[Gozie51]

Solving the problem of one rich person can save thousands of jobs so it depends on who is that rich person and what is their problem.

I would be thinking your view is that the few rich or that rich will help bring out thousands of poor out of that poverty but the majority view of the mindset of the rich is that they don't like to help the poor out of poverty because they want people under them for services they think they have overgrown because of their social status. This factor might disqualify help for a single rich. This is a general view but I believe their are few rich that also want good for the poor.

If you see more replies that say to solve the problems of more poor people then its not a wonder because that is the right thing from an ethical Point of View.

It is trite to consider helping the poor for different reasons. At least the number of poor people keep increase and that leads into different vices in the society. The poor with their size if given help means their will be more labour force that will also contribute to the GDP of the country and that will improve standard of living. A poor person has a very good idea of how to better others behind him because he has been there and that will mean more people getting out of poverty than what would have been with helping a rich.

[bangjoe]

Solving the problem of one rich person can save thousands of jobs so it depends on who is that rich person and what is their problem.

I would be thinking your view is that the few rich or that rich will help bring out thousands of poor out of that poverty but the majority view of the mindset of the rich is that they don't like to help the poor out of poverty because they want people under them for services they think they have overgrown because of their social status. This factor might disqualify help for a single rich. This is a general view but I believe their are few rich that also want good for the poor.

The view that you describe is examined from the behavior of the capitalists, they do not like to lift the poor for the better or in the same ranks as them if the poor are not useful to them. But not all of their rich people are capitalist and have such a viewpoint, but only a small portion if calculated.

If you see more replies that say to solve the problems of more poor people then its not a wonder because that is the right thing from an ethical Point of View.

It is trite to consider helping the poor for different reasons. At least the number of poor people keep increase and that leads into different vices in the society. The poor with their size if given help means their will be more labour force that will also contribute to the GDP of the country and that will improve standard of living. A poor person has a very good idea of how to better others behind him because he has been there and that will mean more people getting out of poverty than what would have been with helping a rich.

From the conception of ethics is true like that, but that does not mean that poor people who have become better will have a more concern for other poor people, this is relative and back again to those people who can become better at the level of life.
But in another point of view, they do help the rich, the better they work the better also for the owner of the business, and for the rich they are a tool to increase their wealth, this is a reverse thought but is quite logical if seen from this point of view .

[Biznesmen]

Someone said that "worrying about bills, food, or other problems leaves less capacity to think ahead or to exert self-discipline. So poverty imposes a mental tax." The Global Inequality Crisis Report says the total wealth of 2153 world billionaires was found to be more than the wealth of 4.6 billion people. The world's richest 1% have more than twice as much wealth as 6.9 billion people. As per the latest information released by the World Bank, nearly half the world is trying to survive on $5.50 a day or less. So we should focus on the 99 percent who are poor, not the 1 percent who are already rich. It's required a concerted effort and bold economic decisions.