And the noose continues to tighten..

Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
Basing something on "what creates the most value" is greed.

What if you could do something for someone else and you actually lost value doing it? Say you baked a cake, using your own goods, and simply gave it away.

"How can I get the most out of this" is often selfish thinking. Even if it is done in the most honest way.

They throw away tons of fruit and vegetables every year because there is either an over abundance of it, or it doesn't meet quality standards. It is edible and safe to eat. Why not give it away? I'll tell you why. If they gave it away it would cut into the profit margin. People would simply take the free stuff instead of paying for it. This is not corrupt or dishonest but it is greedy.
Click to expand...


My post was to illustrate that the means employed should not be ignored when considering an outcome or "end".

A person who is termed greedy would be more likely to focus on the end result and not care about the means they use to achieve it.

A person who expresses rational self interest but who doesn't employ deceitful or fraudulent means is different than the greedy person who does.

I don't like to waste things, so in the case of the fruit vendor, if it were me, I'd probably give it away or turn it into an alternate product. It is in my rational self interest to do so, since I like myself more when I am charitable.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
Where is the differentiating line between self interest and greed?
Click to expand...
I see the line as the removal of choice of a participant. A greedy person would be more likely to employ means (legislation) which reduce peoples choices and creates capture rather than presents voluntary choices.

However, we may be playing semantics as sometimes existing words cannot accurately define an intended meaning. That's why it's important to examine euphemisms and word smithing.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
My post was to illustrate that the means employed should not be ignored when considering an outcome or "end".

A person who is termed greedy would be more likely to focus on the end result and not care about the means they use to achieve it.

A person who expresses rational self interest but who doesn't employ deceitful or fraudulent means is different than the greedy person who does.

I don't like to waste things, so in the case of the fruit vendor, if it were me, I'd probably give it away or turn it into an alternate product. It is in my rational self interest to do so, since I like myself more when I am charitable.
Click to expand...

But it's not you. Not everyone thinks the same way. They never will. Ever. I learned that when I was 9.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I see the line as the removal of choice of a participant. A greedy person would be more likely to employ means (legislation) which reduce peoples choices and creates capture rather than presents voluntary choices.

However, we may be playing semantics as sometimes existing words cannot accurately define an intended meaning. That's why it's important to examine euphemisms and word smithing.
Click to expand...

To me greed means trying to get the most out of something when it's not necessary to do so. Whether it's done with malice or not.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
But it's not you. Not everyone thinks the same way. They never will. Ever. I learned that when I was 9.
Click to expand...
Yet, if, when people apply "rational self interest" in ways that do not use an initiation of offensive forceful means, more people are able to think as they will and still not subject others to their way of thinking or living.

What I said is not just an application of what I think, it is an application of demonstrable logic and is the only way to co-exist peacefully. Peace.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Yet, if, when people apply "rational self interest" in ways that do not use an initiation of offensive forceful means, more people are able to think as they will and still not subject others to their way of thinking or living.

What I said is not just an application of what I think, it is an application of demonstrable logic and is the only way to co-exist peacefully. Peace.
Click to expand...

It is not human nature to "co-exist peacefully". If it were we would never have ended up where we are today.

Humans are violent, greedy, deceitful, dishonest, vindictive, spiteful ... It's part of what we are made up of. It will never go away.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
To me greed means trying to get the most out of something when it's not necessary to do so. Whether it's done with malice or not.
Click to expand...
The counter mechanism to greed is competition. The greedy keep the greedy in check.

Once someone comes up with a product or service that allows them to be greedy, other greedy people jump on the idea and compete and bring the prices down to a reasonable level of greed.

Nobody is ever going to be able to legislate a better balancing system than that.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
The counter mechanism to greed is competition. The greedy keep the greedy in check.

Once someone comes up with a product or service that allows them to be greedy, other greedy people jump on the idea and compete and bring the prices down to a reasonable level of greed.

Nobody is ever going to be able to legislate a better balancing system than that.
Click to expand...
So now you are talking about a free market that doesn't really exist. Today's greedy people are colluding with other greedy people to keep the 99% in check.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
It is not human nature to "co-exist peacefully". If it were we would never have ended up where we are today.

Humans are violent, greedy, deceitful, dishonest, vindictive, spiteful ... It's part of what we are made up of. It will never go away.
Click to expand...
To counter that, I'd also say if that were all we are, we couldn't exist in large societies. People also cooperate with each other and frequently show the ability to act for the betterment of others to their own cost. Societies that place a high value on cooperation and provide a safety net for those experiencing difficulties do better than ones that are less so. Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Norway and other countries all have stronger social security systems than we do. The people in those societies are on average happier and have higher social mobility than we do.
 
Last edited:
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
To me greed means trying to get the most out of something when it's not necessary to do so. Whether it's done with malice or not.
Click to expand...

If we viewed it objectively, "when it's not necessary" is a matter of perspective.

If the person attempting to "get the most out of something", feels it's necessary to achive a certain goal, but you or I do not, our placing OUR limits on them could be construed as a form of greed.

That's why I return to evaluating the means a person uses to help me determine whether their actions are something that concerns me or not and whether I have the right to intervene or not.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
fdd2blk said:
It is not human nature to "co-exist peacefully". If it were we would never have ended up where we are today.

Humans are violent, greedy, deceitful, dishonest, vindictive, spiteful ... It's part of what we are made up of. It will never go away.
Click to expand...

Except my mother, she is a saint.

I do agree many people fall short on peacefully co-existing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top