> No quantity of money can end poverty What definition of poverty are you using? Certainly studies have been done: https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrele

> No quantity of money can end poverty What definition of poverty are you using? Certainly studies have been done: https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2013-01-19/annual-income-richest-100-people-enough-end-global-poverty-four https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2013-01-19/... > the quantity of money existing is pretty much irrelevant to that. I mean, that's what I'm saying, but as it is now, if I had a billion dollars, I could build a few wells in Africa, yanno? > Money is debt... Clearly, but in addition to that, my point is that the system of money needs people to be in debt. There's no "neutral state" as it were, and indeed, many of the efforts of the IMF and World Bank are calculated to get poor countries further in debt.