Greed

[Padawanbater2]

Was Gordon Gekko right? Is greed good?

"Greed is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms, greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed, you mark my words, will not only save [Teldar Paper], but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."

Do you think it's a good thing that a few years ago, 82 people owned as much wealth as 50% of the global population, then a few years later that number dropped to 62 people.. then, this year that number dropped to just 8 people.. There are 8 people with a combined wealth that equals more than 3.7 BILLION others.. Now, if you indeed think that's a good thing, please explain why

I think Gekko's speech is right. I think greed can and in many cases does lead to unimaginable innovation. No doubt about it. Money motivates people to create things and those things they create sometimes change the world. But he ignores the dark sides to greed, when an insurance company wants to save money so they deny a preexisting condition, when a car company decides to go ahead with the class action lawsuit because their financial advisors figured it would be cheaper than recalling all the vehicles and fixing them so people aren't killed instead.. or when a drug company decides to distribute known tainted product in 3rd world countries so they don't take the financial loss..

So what do you think?

 

[ttystikk]

Was Gordon Gekko right? Is greed good?

"Greed is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms, greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed, you mark my words, will not only save [Teldar Paper], but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."

Do you think it's a good thing that a few years ago, 82 people owned as much wealth as 50% of the global population, then a few years later that number dropped to 62 people.. then, this year that number dropped to just 8 people.. There are 8 people with a combined wealth that equals more than 3.7 BILLION others.. Now, if you indeed think that's a good thing, please explain why

I think Gekko's speech is right. I think greed can and in many cases does lead to unimaginable innovation. No doubt about it. Money motivates people to create things and those things they create sometimes change the world. But he ignores the dark sides to greed, when an insurance company wants to save money so they deny a preexisting condition, when a car company decides to go ahead with the class action lawsuit because their financial advisors figured it would be cheaper than recalling all the vehicles and fixing them so people aren't killed instead.. or when a drug company decides to distribute known tainted product in 3rd world countries so they don't take the financial loss..

So what do you think?

Gordon Gekko's siren call to a generation that ended up with the blood of the Great Crash of 2008 on its hands, but isn't stopping there. The film was meant to be a cautionary tale but instead it inspired a generation to engage in an ever deepening race to the bottom.

An age where screwing over whoever to get yours is considered good business practice.

Raiding pension funds. Evading taxes on a grand scale. Drowning our political system in BILLIONS of dollars to buy ever more favorable rules.

The Joint Strike Fighter boondoggle has made Lockheed Martin $3 TRILLION DOLLARS, that's twice the total cost of the Iraq war against Saddam.

Holders of vast fortunes are now most hereditary heirs, a new aristocracy who won't ever have to work, whose capital controls everyone else and whose goals often run so counter to the needs of the people that famine and outright starvation are real possibilities, just as they've happened in the past.

Greed isn't good. It's a prime cause and symptom of 'Tragedy of the Commons', where the advantage of the individual runs counter to the needs of society at large.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Some greed is good, take that second piece of pie...

But just make sure there's enough left over for the rest of us.

 

[ttystikk]

Great article, highly relevant to the thread topic;

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/02/why-the-maximize-shareholder-value-theory-is-bogus.html

My favorite quote in the article, by economist Steven Pearlstein;

It is our social capital that is now badly depleted. This erosion manifests in the weakened norms of behavior that once restrained the most selfish impulses of economic actors and provided an ethical basis for modern capitalism. A capitalism in which Wall Street bankers and traders think peddling dangerous loans or worthless securities to unsuspecting customers is just “part of the game,” a capitalism in which top executives believe it is economically necessary that they earn 350 times what their front-line workers do, a capitalism that thinks of employees as expendable inputs, a capitalism in which corporations perceive it as both their fiduciary duty to evade taxes and their constitutional right to use unlimited amounts of corporate funds to purchase control of the political system—that is a capitalism whose trust deficit is every bit as corrosive as budget and trade deficits.

 

[Fogdog]

Was Gordon Gekko right? Is greed good?

"Greed is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms, greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed, you mark my words, will not only save [Teldar Paper], but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."

Do you think it's a good thing that a few years ago, 82 people owned as much wealth as 50% of the global population, then a few years later that number dropped to 62 people.. then, this year that number dropped to just 8 people.. There are 8 people with a combined wealth that equals more than 3.7 BILLION others.. Now, if you indeed think that's a good thing, please explain why

I think Gekko's speech is right. I think greed can and in many cases does lead to unimaginable innovation. No doubt about it. Money motivates people to create things and those things they create sometimes change the world. But he ignores the dark sides to greed, when an insurance company wants to save money so they deny a preexisting condition, when a car company decides to go ahead with the class action lawsuit because their financial advisors figured it would be cheaper than recalling all the vehicles and fixing them so people aren't killed instead.. or when a drug company decides to distribute known tainted product in 3rd world countries so they don't take the financial loss..

So what do you think?

What is greed to you? Is it the desire unto obsession to accumulate huge piles of cash, investments, land or wealth beyond any rational need? Or is it something else?

The people I know who truly innovated and built companies weren't motivated first by greed or accumulating huge piles of cash. They were passionate about building their company and creating their products. Profits were necessary to do accomplish this. Yes, they grew wealthy with the company but money wasn't the main driver. In most cases, their wealth stayed in the company. They didn't take huge bonuses or salaries.

The people who came after the founders and innovators are the ones that I saw were most motivated by accumulating piles of cash. Those people made big piles of cash but hollowed out the company until it eventually was split up sold off. From what I saw, after subtracting the bonuses and massive payouts they received after they were fired by the board who selected them, those money managers didn't do well for the shareholders.

The obsessive drive to accumulate possessions and wealth beyond any future need while deliberately harming the lives of others is what I think of as greed. If greed is that, then I'd say its disease.

 

[schuylaar]

What is greed to you? Is it the desire unto obsession to accumulate huge piles of cash, investments, land or wealth beyond any rational need? Or is it something else?

The people I know who truly innovated and built companies weren't motivated first by greed or accumulating huge piles of cash. They were passionate about building their company and creating their products. Profits were necessary to do accomplish this. Yes, they grew wealthy with the company but money wasn't the main driver. In most cases, their wealth stayed in the company. They didn't take huge bonuses or salaries.

The people who came after the founders and innovators are the ones that I saw were most motivated by accumulating piles of cash. Those people made big piles of cash but hollowed out the company until it eventually was split up sold off. From what I saw, after subtracting the bonuses and massive payouts they received after they were fired by the board who selected them, those money managers didn't do well for the shareholders.

The obsessive drive to accumulate possessions and wealth beyond any future need while deliberately harming the lives of others is what I think of as greed. If greed is that, then I'd say its disease.

And those who were hired and fired by the Board will be up and running in 30 days elsewhere causing same destruction with another company ravaging it until there's nothing left similar to a sycophant.

 

[schuylaar]

What is greed to you? Is it the desire unto obsession to accumulate huge piles of cash, investments, land or wealth beyond any rational need? Or is it something else?

The people I know who truly innovated and built companies weren't motivated first by greed or accumulating huge piles of cash. They were passionate about building their company and creating their products. Profits were necessary to do accomplish this. Yes, they grew wealthy with the company but money wasn't the main driver. In most cases, their wealth stayed in the company. They didn't take huge bonuses or salaries.

The people who came after the founders and innovators are the ones that I saw were most motivated by accumulating piles of cash. Those people made big piles of cash but hollowed out the company until it eventually was split up sold off. From what I saw, after subtracting the bonuses and massive payouts they received after they were fired by the board who selected them, those money managers didn't do well for the shareholders.

The obsessive drive to accumulate possessions and wealth beyond any future need while deliberately harming the lives of others is what I think of as greed. If greed is that, then I'd say its disease.

It's the WASP definition of Circle of Life.

Greed is good as long as their lives include philanthropy to gain access to heaven.

 

[Fogdog]

It's the WASP definition of Circle of Life.

Greed is good as long as their lives include philanthropy to gain access to heaven.

Don't forget "Charity to the deserving poor".

 

[Fogdog]

And those who were hired and fired by the Board will be up and running in 30 days elsewhere causing same destruction with another company ravaging it until there's nothing left similar to a sycophant.

Yep, they can lose billions -- 20 billion -- in one case, and after rejection by the board, the shit head moved on to do the same thing to another company. Tens of millions was awarded as the asshat left and his stock options were worth a lot more than that. More than one example of this I've seen.

 

[Padawanbater2]

What is greed to you?

Greed to me is obtaining that beyond which you need to live the lifestyle of your choosing within reason

 

[ttystikk]

Greed is the willful impoverishment of others at the expense of your gain.

 

[Fogdog]

Greed is the willful impoverishment of others at the expense of your gain.

Is willfully impoverishing others necessary to be called greedy? I remember glorifying in my big bag of Halloween trick or treat haul as a kid. The older I got the longer my range was on Halloween. I'd go through the bag and separate the good stuff from the boring, like suckers and that dumb "corn" candy. A mini hershey's chocolate crisp bar or a peanut butter cup, now that was trading material.

I was greedy, greedy, greedy about that bag of dentist visits. I don't have any idea if I was harming anybody other than myself.

 

[MrRoboto]

Holders of vast fortunes are now most hereditary heirs.

False

70% are self made.

I understand your desire to hate on the spoiled brats of the world. But the truth is that most of these spoiled brats squander their fortune and redistribute wealth.

Bill Gates
Mark Zuckerberg
Warren Buffett

Did they earn it or ???

Their heirs will likely live a good life no doubt. Will they remain on top of the list? I dare say no fuckin way.

 

[UncleBuck]

False

70% are self made.

how do you define "self made"?

a high school dropout born to wealthy parents does better in life than college graduates born to poor parents.

but it is cute to see a bunch of brokedick rednecks who will never get out of the bottom 20% idolize the wealthy as if they are this magical group of god-like figures.

 

[UncleBuck]

 

[ttystikk]

The people I know who truly innovated and built companies weren't motivated first by greed or accumulating huge piles of cash. They were passionate about building their company and creating their products. Profits were necessary to do accomplish this. Yes, they grew wealthy with the company but money wasn't the main driver. In most cases, their wealth stayed in the company. They didn't take huge bonuses or salaries.

THIS.

It's what I'm doing with my life. I will consider myself a success if I'm able to help future generations grow their own food and medicine affordably, rather than judging merely by the size of my asset management account.

 

[Fogdog]

False

70% are self made.

I understand your desire to hate on the spoiled brats of the world. But the truth is that most of these spoiled brats squander their fortune and redistribute wealth.

Bill Gates
Mark Zuckerberg
Warren Buffett

Did they earn it or ???

Their heirs will likely live a good life no doubt. Will they remain on top of the list? I dare say no fuckin way.

I don't know where you get your information but Gates grew Microsoft and doesn't earn a billion dollars a year, same with Zuckerberg. In a report published in 2012, the top 25 richest hedge fund investors earned more than 29 billion dollars. I'd put Buffet in the same category as them. Private equity investment groups -- hedge funds specifically generate no added value. Most hedge funds suck value out of the economy and replace it with debt. The financial sector accounts for about 20% of all the people in the top 1% of earners. .

What especially doesn't add up with what you said is that the US has a low level of social mobility. People at the top or born in families at the top of the social ladder tend to stay there. Only about 8% of people in lower economic status actually break into the top earning groups replacing the few who manage to lose status.

 

[ttystikk]

False

70% are self made.

I understand your desire to hate on the spoiled brats of the world. But the truth is that most of these spoiled brats squander their fortune and redistribute wealth.

Bill Gates
Mark Zuckerberg
Warren Buffett

Did they earn it or ???

Their heirs will likely live a good life no doubt. Will they remain on top of the list? I dare say no fuckin way.

That's an old statistic from the 1980s. NOWADAYS, most billionaires came by it from their forebears.

Bill Gate's folks were quite well off, giving him the chance to build a company instead of going to work as a electronics tech. The rest have similar stories.

Nice job picking out the famous.

How about the Walton clan? Sam built Walmart, but his half dozen odd kids are STILL near the top of the Forbes 400 list.

Why don't they need to pay taxes?

Answer us that, Mr Statistics.

 

[ttystikk]

I don't know where you get your information but Gates grew Microsoft and doesn't earn a billion dollars a year, same with Zuckerberg. In a report published in 2012, the top 25 richest hedge fund investors earned more than 29 billion dollars. I'd put Buffet in the same category as them. Private equity investment groups -- hedge funds specifically generate no added value. Most hedge funds suck value out of the economy and replace it with debt. The financial sector accounts for about 20% of all the people in the top 1% of earners. .

What especially doesn't add up with what you said is that the US has a low level of social mobility. People at the top or born in families at the top of the social ladder tend to stay there. Only about 8% of people in lower economic status actually break into the top earning groups replacing the few who manage to lose status.

THIS.

Mr Roboto has been fed bullshit and can only be faulted for regurgitating it because he didn't bother to check if what he was fed squares with the truth.

 

[ttystikk]

how do you define "self made"?

a high school dropout born to wealthy parents does better in life than college graduates born to poor parents.

but it is cute to see a bunch of brokedick rednecks who will never get out of the bottom 20% idolize the wealthy as if they are this magical group of god-like figures.

Lol so true, so damned true.