>If the pot of money was endless, why shouldn't we give 1 million$ from it to each person on Earth?

There are those who would agree. Some here in this very forum.

>The money would loose all it's power if it was unlimited.

This was claimed when we went off the gold standard, yet here we are.

>It's the basic principle of the demand and the offer. So yes, a person always get richer on the back of another.

There is not a finite supply of money because the government can always print more. In addition, all resources which are brought into the economy (precious metals, stones...) add to the money supply. The price will stabilize through supply/demand laws and inflationary/deflationary pressures.


>>Why should there be a limit? Talk like this suggests that there is a finite pot of money out there and if one person earns more money then another must make less. This is not the case. Unlike the cattle-futures market, the world economy is not a zero-sum game.