Thanks for your good hearted article Umair.
It strikes me that such a golden rule can be perfectly valid to all people, but only on one condition; that the source of our income is perceived by each of us individually to be infinite, supplied at a rate of maybe twice what we personally need to supply our own basic needs every day.
I think there are amongst us special people who can selflessly make that decision in any case, the prevalence of examples of that seem much higher in countries or environments where everyone is equally poor, but in countries where there are already obviously large imbalances of wealth, with perceived high income insecurity, it is obviously a very rare quality.
Ever noticed street beggars often voluntarily demonstrate something like the golden rule? If one in that situation is sitting with another, and we are handed a single loaf of bread, there is a high likeliehood we we will immediately break off half, and give to the other.
There is no reason for either to worry that tomorrow, or any day afterwards, neither one nor the other will have any trouble begging another loaf.
For that reason, unless there is also a fundamental change to the source of wealth (energy), from finite, as it is currently, to infinite (solar), I don’t see the majority of people in the West ever voting in favour of a “half for me, half for others” rule, golden as it might be, because each individual in their own mind believes that sooner or later, we are each going to need our own reserves of wealth, which as things stand, can only be built up by hoarding, therefore our primary drive is to stash as much as possible for ourselves whilst we and our economies are still fit to do so, at the expense of others, or otherwise.
Perhaps it is key for anyone offering a solution including the golden rule, to promise also rapid implementation of solar power, for that reason.
Then the dreaded repeated question of; “But where is all the money going to come from?”can be truly answered.