Economic quiz

You are present with two magical buttons by the invisible hand of the free market. The first button you press choose the magical effect:
The blue button once pushed will kill each minute the most poor person on the planet.
The red button once pushed will kill each minute the most rich person on the planet.
Both effects will skip a minute if the current richest person is less than twice as rich as the poorest person, and all effects are calculated by current assets and currency(i.e. net worth excluding debts.)
Explain why would you choose a specific button and what it would mean for the world future.
Bonus:Explain your optimal survival strategy or business plan in the new world.
Extra bonus:Find loopholes in the effect that would make you immune to one of the effects.

I steal the invisible hand. Sounds pretty useful.

>>2
You can't steal the invisible hand of the free market, because its non-material as well as invisible. That hand can steal your money though, by raising the prices of common goods or increasing inflation.

invisible handjob

*gives >>3-kun invisible bitch slap*

This is an old question which OP has hijacked to push his anti-free-market agenda. Be careful.

>>6
Replies with sage carry a fee of 3.5$/post, the free market decided it.

>>6
Also, those with Bronze level Tinychan subscriptions can't use capital letters(thats a Gold level subscription perk). That'll be a 20$ fine.

Is there any point to pushing the blue button? Will it ever be noticed for its effect(say the first 100 years)?

>>9
Well, it's 31M people/year, about a quarter of the current birth rate. Since newborns are the least likely to have assests that should fit the criteria for ``most poor''. Doubtful it will have any significant impact.

oops, analysis done for deaths/sec rather than /min. So even less impact.

525600 deaths/year
52.5mdeath/century

>>10
Assuming the effect only covers persons able legally to own assets, i.e. legal adults.

>>13
No; that would literally put the ASS in assumption.

>>14
Origin and Etymology of assumption

Middle English, from Late Latin assumption-, assumptio taking up, from Latin assumere — see assume

assumptio my ASS

>>13
ackchyually, in most legislations there's nothing preventing children from owning things. if rich people die but their're are newborn child survives, the child will still inherit. exercising conrol over those things - that's different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_(law)

>>17
A child can't be trusted to decide anything asset-related. What if a 5-year old sells your house a for a pizza?
Children are not smart enough to handle authority and their ownership rights are purely symbolic - the article describes this here:

Generally, the courts base their determination on whether the minor, after reaching the age of majority, has had ample opportunity to consider the nature of the contractual obligations he or she entered into as a minor and the extent to which the adult party to the contract has performed

>>17
And what does that have to do with the millions of kids being squirted out in the jungles and rice paddies?