Forum Post: The Creed of Greed
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 10:57 a.m. EST by ltjaxson
(184)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I am unnerved by the amount of people on this forum that think, in the words of Gordon Geko, 'Greed is good' and socio-economic mobility is best obtained individually. We all want a better life for our children than we had, and if this includes a system of progressive taxation to ensure they get a good education and college degree at a low cost, then how is that a bad thing? The point is that our system has regressed from a collaborative effort to advance the welfare of society for all - by all, to a culture of greed that will ultimately make life for our children harder, not easier...
Greed is NOT good! Greed is the problem.
Capitalism, with a healthy dose of responsibilty and ethics, will lead to Prosperity for the majority of people.
Greed is not necessary for capitalism. Creativity, ambition and the individual pursuit of prosperity is necessary for capitalism.
Greed is a personal failure of morality which leads to destruction.
I think some of our capitalistic culture has lost its way in terms of responsiblity and ethics.
wrong: your entire system is based upon endless consumption and endless greed. Greed is not good: it is evil. waste is not good: it is evil. Until you recognize the root evils of your system, you will continue to think it is perfectly okay to drink coffee which is a drug, drink Coke and Pepsi and soft drinks which is sugar waterand bad for you and has created a generation of children who are diabetic before they reach the age of ten,,, and eat cheese and pizza: which clogs your arteries and creates heart attacks. You don't even want to get rid of the top 1% of greedy people! Never mind the 99% of consumers who are also greedy and who also want money and love money and can't live without money.
You cannot legislate personal morality and personal ethics. But you can create a social morality which frowns upon individual morals and ethics which are irresponsible. You can get rid of people who are criminals and make the system so these criminals do not get away with legalized robbery and legalized murder. To do that: you must identify who the enemy is and treat them accordingly. You don't even realize that you are on the side of the criminals! Because you haven't studied the history of civilization, you do not understand that greed has always been evil and never been good, Consumption and waste and pollution and destruction of the natural eco-systems of the world has always been evil and not good. The history of civilized evil did not begin with your generation of spoiled babies. It goes back millions of years. What all of you lack is an understanding of the past, and a historical perspective on your present situation. The seeds of capitalistic greed were implanted into your system known as civilization thousands of years before civilization was ever invented.
IF... you ever study the history of the past deeply enough, you will realize that it is civilization itself which is the culprit: not the top 1% of it. If you want to solve the ROOT of your problems you must do away with the entire system: all of it... not just the top 1%. Otherwise, even if you kill every billionaire and millionaire alive today : they will be replaced by even worse, more evil, more cunning, more greedy billionaires. Your basic problem can be put into one word: accumulation. Overpopulation is the root of ALL your problems. Overpopulation IS accumulation. So is accumulating money. So is accumulating anything else for that matter. . 7 billion apes having too many babies is your root problem. 7 billion apes accumulating pieces of paper called money while they waste and destroy the earth in their race to make money is just one SYMPTOM of the deeper root problem of your accumulating overpopulation of the earth..
Get rid of the basic root dynamic that causes overpopulation: and you will also get rid of the accumulated mass of billions of greedy consumers, and you will also get rid of the top 1% of the worst ones. Oops: that means you: personally. YOU are the problem. All of you are the problem. There are just too many of you, and you keep on fucking like there is not tomorrow: which is exactly what you are doing now: leading future generations into a dead end with no future... which is what your PARENT did to you... which is what you GRANDPARENT did to your parents... leaving you holding the bag, leaving you with all their mistakes which they did not fix and did not solve. If you want to solve your problems you must stop overpopulating the world NOW, and stop accumulating NOW, and stop haggling over money NOW.
But even THAT will not solve your problem at its ROOT. You must change how you live at its root level; and that means no more having too many babies all over the earth, everywhere... no more pornographic culture of sex and self-gratification as the most sacred religious principle you now are living by.and practice.
If the human ape cannot control its own numbers and its own greed and its own penis and its own cunt and its own sex drive: it is doomed to complete extinction.
The idea! That human s... people are 'free' to fuck anyone anytime they wish!... The idea! That you are allowed to bring into the world more people and accumulate more people anytime you want anywhere you want! The idea! That the only religious 'good' is 'growth'...he continual growth of GDP, the continual growth of consumption, the growth of human population, the continual growth of the spread of global pollution all over the earth... is perfectly fine and normal...while you little spoiled farts in the richest nation on earth waste your time bickering over who has more money than you do!
The idea! That every human apes are supposed to be 'free' to please themselves without worrying about the earth they despoil and pollute... that idea leads straight into extinction. Once the eco-systems you are now destroying cannot support your industrialized wasteful lifestyle anymore: all of you will disappear from the earth faster than a mayfly.
You are right, our current system of economics can best be obtained by all through a healthy dose of responsibilty and ethics...
Agreed, and I particularly like the statement -- the point is that our system has regressed from a collaborative effort to advance the welfare of society for all - by all, to a culture of greed that will ultimately make life for our children harder, not easier -- so perhaps you would consider our group's proposal of an alternative online direct democracy of government and business at http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo and then join our group's 20 members committed to that plan at http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
Thanks for that. I will be sure to check it out!
Thanks for that. I will be sure to check it out!
Ask the right questions. It is not about party politics. Who has the money? Who caused the crisis? Let's see: Lehman brothers, Schwatz, Goldman Sacs, Oppenheimer, ... Start to think. Philosophy governs policy! Don't forget that. Don't let the NYtimes, owned by them by the way, to tell you other wise. You have the right to protest, you have the right to revolution, even Thomas Jefferson said that.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Lets make sure people know what questions to ask. Whether we like it or not, this has been primarily a middle-class protest and we need to make sure that the people most affected by Wall Street greed know they have options and that there is an alternative...
How can I get a message to the LiveStream camera man?
Let's fight to take two giant steps 1. End the Lobby System 2. Stop Campaing Contributions.
Absolutely, However, Occupy Wall St.will not succeed unless the people who represent the movement start conducting themselves like professionals. Stop using fowl language, dress and talk like professionals. Everyone must remember this is Not black vs white or Left vs Right We need to focus the fight against Wallstreet, the and the lobby system, and the 1% wealthy controlling our country I have gotten some of my friends and family behind this movement only to loose them again. I lost them because they were turned off by the fowl language. Lets unite to fight Against the greed and corruption that has stolen our political system.
The devil is in the details, my friend. How much is enough, and who decides. And once you've decided, how to enforce your demands and attain what you've envisioned. You cannot legislate morality. It is impossible. You can try if you want, but if a person is "greedy" or "immoral" in your eyes, they're not going to change just because you passed a law. In fact, they will respond much like OWS, with tactics designed to prevent your goal from happening. Let's just take an example. A guy has a disposable income of $1 million, made from dividends on investments that he has made. Currently, he figures his 15% tax on that is fair, so $150,000 goes to the government. You step in and pass a law that says he's now taxed at the same rate as his normal income, 36% or so. He instructs his broker to sell his security and takes the $1M and buys a piece of land with it. He figures he can even overpay for it if necessary, due to his $210,000 tax savings, and he can hold onto the land and let it appreciate and not pay any taxes on it. Now, you're down $150,000. See how it works? Corporations are the same way, for every law or regulation you can pass, they will find a way around it, or if necessary, move to another country. The key is to come up with something that everyone agrees is fair, but it ain't easy, because there is just too big a gap in what people think government should be paying for to start with.
I understand your point, but have to argue against it. The person will still have to pay property taxes, etc.
The way forward is in the form of worker-led industry and co-operatives. You make an excellent point about shareholders and the system they abuse - so lets take away the shareholder. Worker-led industry, for example, gives the rights of a shareholder to the worker, so they receive voting rights on how the business is handled on issues such as pay, redundancy and security of his job and share in his/her share of the profits. Shareholders only see the bottom line and wouldnt think twice to vote to send jobs to other countries if it will increase his profit margins. However, no employee is going to vote to send his job overseas. It promotes fair pay for fair work while creating a more economically equal community and preserving the rights of private industry. Co-operatives work the same way. If a community starts a co-operative bank that ensures the rights of the depositors as their main goal by entending voting privleges on how their money is invested and a share of those profits, then it is more money they deposit and the beautiful cycle continues. It is the ultimate form of empowerment. Take the money out of the hands of landed wealth, institute a progressive tax system, and subsidize companies that want to share in the profits with their employees and not shareholders.
I understand your point, but have to argue against it. The person will still have to pay property taxes, etc.
The way forward is in the form of worker-led industry and co-operatives. You make an excellent point about shareholders and the system they abuse - so lets take away the shareholder. Worker-led industry, for example, gives the rights of a shareholder to the worker, so they receive voting rights on how the business is handled on issues such as pay, redundancy and security of his job and share in his/her share of the profits. Shareholders only see the bottom line and wouldnt think twice to vote to send jobs to other countries if it will increase his profit margins. However, no employee is going to vote to send his job overseas. It promotes fair pay for fair work while creating a more economically equal community and preserving the rights of private industry. Co-operatives work the same way. If a community starts a co-operative bank that ensures the rights of the depositors as their main goal by entending voting privleges on how their money is invested and a share of those profits, then it is more money they deposit and the beautiful cycle continues. It is the ultimate form of empowerment. Take the money out of the hands of landed wealth, institute a progressive tax system, and subsidize companies that want to share in the profits with their employees and not shareholders.
You are forgetting one key component to the beautiful cycle. The risk taker.The initial shareholder (owner), which can be in the form of an individual or a big corporation, who finance themselves with people who buy their stock (shareholders). If you wish to live in an agrarian type economy (co-ops aren't going to work building missile defense sytems) you're welcome to advocate for that. But you're starting your argument after the risk has initially been taken, success has been achieved. There was risk of complete failure, total loss of a person or company's investment to start the business. That's why they want outsized rewards vs. the people who they hire to work for them who did not take the risk. I'm fine with everyone putting in say, $5,000 of their own money and sharing equal rewards. The employees do in fact help create the wealth, but they do not sign personal guarantees for the owner's debts on his equipment or leases. Owners do indeed look at the bottom line, as they need to try and remain in business (seriously, wouldn't you?). There are competitors trying to gain an advantage and put them out of business every day. The more they make, the longer they can withstand a downturn. You simply must put yourselves in the shoes of a business owner, and not just the employee. Just as an aside, there are many, many companies who have employee profit sharing plans, and many, many dedicated small owners who sometimes pay out of their own pockets to keep employees or pay some bill for them. Unfortunately, if they do this too often, they'll likely be the one turning out the lights, then everyone loses.
Whats the difference between everyone losing and the current economic climate. If anything it is incentive to make the cycle in every phase of life viable and sustainable and not subjected to boom nad bust. If the employees are the risk takers, then they are more likely to ensure the business succeeds as a whole. If the employees were the ones offering these guarantees then once again there would be more incentive to be more efficient. I am sure these type of businesses, if they had their backs to the wall, would look at the bottom line too, but they would do it collectively through a voting system. Profit sharing without contracts is usually the first thing to go and subjected to the boss' discretion, but if this was a form of private pension, then it would be approached in a different manner. It is undeniable that the current system centers around the capital controlling the work force and it is undeniable that the work force should control the capital. Because if they dont, then this is nothing more than an extension of feudalism and the same relationship between lord and sefr pacified trhough years of small increments of 'progression'.
I have no problem if the employees want to be the risk takers, just collect the necessary dollars from them to start the business, buy the equipment, sign the lease for office or warehouse space, buy the office supplies, pay initial payroll. They would indeed be extremely careful about being efficient. There is an old saying that "the man with the gold makes the rules". It is largely true in our society. If you can come up with a way, and I think you may be implying that the government should essentially be the intial risk-taker here, then the risk of failure falls on the government, we just tried that with Solyndra. I come from the commercial real estate arena, where a typical brokerage company has what you would call "lords and serfs" or "chiefs and indians" as we'd call them. The chiefs pay their indians a portion of the fees they bring in, they pay their secretaries a fixed salary. The more fees the indian brings in, the more valuable he becomes. The secretary, she's just typing up the contracts, a job many, many other people can do, so she doesn't have the upward mobility in terms of income that her indian does. Anyway, the indian is a really good salesman and produces a lot and so the chief tries to bribe him into staying with a higher percentage of the fees he's bringing in (the chief is paying overhead and keeping the rest). This works until the indian wakes up one day and realizes he doesn't need the chief anymore, he can go be a chief with another firm, or go out on his own and be his own chief and keep all of his earnings. The problem I see with this movement and a lot of people in general, is they are just really concerned about being an indian, and never consider the possibility of being a chief. It's like I was saying in another thread, I just can't understand why the OWS movement doesn't start a business out of this, start working on the jobs issue by being the ones who PROVIDE jobs. They'd be heroes to everyone. They have the talent, the creativity, the industriousness, the mental fortitude, the motivation, and what appears to be enough initial money to be successful. They just need a product or service, start interviewing each other, and off they go. What I see is just a lot of indians sitting around bitching about what assholes their chiefs are.
You are so missing the point. For one the govt.'s investment in Solyndra isnt a bad one in my opinion because as we all know, reducing the dependency on foreign oil should be a major goal of US policy. We spent billions on bank bail-outs, the least we could do is loan those who want to practice a more efficient and transparent alternative. As for the chief and indians analogy, nobody gets rich by themselves as you pointed out and the system should be in place for the indians to decide whether they want to be a chief or not. Besides the chief either obtained his position through heredity or warlord status - similar situation to our economic system. You cant blame people for not wanting to step on other people to get them to the top. I dont think it is just a bunch of indians bitching about the chief...
No, in this instance the chief got to be a chief by being better at doing something than others, in this case being a much better salesman. Heredity and warlord status? Try smarts, passion, motivation, and yes, greed. Why is it that you would assume that if we're both real estate salesmen, and I sell more real estate than you because I get to the office earlier and stay later, make more calls, practice and make my pitch better, etc. that I am somehow stepping on you if I rise to the top and run my own firm or am able to command a higher commission split than you? Why should the secretary who types the contracts be paid the same as the one who brings in the business that enables her salary to be paid in the first place? If all you want to argue about are bank bailouts and corporate influence in politics, then I am with you 100%, but I fear that this is not nearly where the movement wants to go with this. The government should stay out of picking winners and losers in the private sector. If it is such a necessity, get the public on your side and willing to buy it, and the private sector will fund it with no problem.
You are exactly right - hard work is not the issue here. And I agree one hundred percent in working hard. There just needs to be a progressive tax system to increase the level of competition with a level playing field...that is all. Bank bailouts and corporate greed = bad, hard work and determinitation = good! Good talk...
Serious question: Can you define 'greed' and at what point does it become destructive?
If I have a one bedroom apartment, adequate nutrition (but not 'expensive' food), and some basic creature comforts, but I want more, is that greed? If I have a 2 bedroom house, better food, a car and a few luxuries but I want more, is that greed?
I have a feeling this post may come off as snarky but I swear it's an honest question.
I totally appreciate your question! I've thought the same thing! I honestly don't know, but I think we all know it when we see it??!!
I don't think simply wanting more is greed. My dictionary (see, I had to look it up, because I don't know!) uses the terms "inordinate and excessive amounts". Which I suppose could be applied to societal norms? Which is how we would know it when we see it!
excess wealth for the advatage of authority...
Again, serious question: At what point is wealth "excessive"? Is it the USE of wealth (e.g. to influence politicians) or the wealth itself?
whenever people use it for the advatage of authority...
So it's really corruption that's the problem then, not wealth in and of itself. Would you agree?
where there is wealth there is corruption. No I dont agree that private wealth is free from blame. Corruption co-exists with authority and wealth, wealth and authority co-exist with greed. Call it whatever you want, but it is undeniable that greed is never a good thing. Hopefully we are closer together than farther apart...
Wealth is also relative. Compared to the citizens of Nepal, the poorest of Americans is obscenely wealthy. Are we all corrupt?
Yes, we are all corrupt...
Exactly.
It is the rich Jews that are destroying the USA. Take a look. Don't believe me. Bloomberg, Schwartz, Lehman, Goldman Sachs, etc. Get it? Jews don't care about the non-chosen people, which we are. We are 99% they are the 1%, but own most of the world now. Look at the U symbol or KSA or K symbols on food. It means it is Kosher. YOU the 99% are paying for their kosher food and they make billions for it because the symbols are patented. They use religion to highjack the food system and we think kosher is better, it is not. They steal our money and do not support anyone but themselves. Again, Wake up America, your freedom is being abused by wealthy Zionist Jews. International Jewry is destroying the world again.
For everyone's sake try to phrase what you write in a way that the corporate media can't call us bigots. I agree everyone you named are a huge problem
I agree but they also own the media. We have to take a stand at some point. It is not bigotry, it is the truth. They are the ones that call it that. That is what we were taught. It is time to change the rules. Don't believe what I say, it is clear enough by itself. It is self evident.
Oh I believe what you say I am just suggesting you don't feed them ammunition to shoot back. We can do that by pointing fingers at individuals and we don't have to mention religion, color, or ethnics. The goals is to get individuals out of power. But I do agree the media is trying to control the vernacular in which we speak and that will change if we can get the corporate corruption out of Washington.