Jump to content

Is greed good?


Recommended Posts

Gordon Gecko famously said that greed is good. Some believe it is the only thing that makes an economy function. However, look how it affects the auto repair industry.

 

 

 


Absolutely stay away from national chain repairs stores. These are operated from a distant corporate office, receive a yearly list of target goals (money they are expected to make every month) with intense pressure put on the managers and mechanics to make it happen. It is a poor business model in that it prizes profits above all else. Also, most of the chain stores use the cheapest parts they can buy. A common incentive is the lifetime brake pad warranty. People continue to believe they will get something for nothing, and continue to let this lifetime pitch hypnotize them. The warranty is only good if you resurface your rotors. This is not covered under the warranty--that's an extra 50 bucks or more each time, and more than pays for shop cost on the pads as well as labor. Then every 3 times or so, your rotors will be too thin to cut and you'll have to buy new ones, as well as new mounting hardware and maybe calipers too. Refuse to pay for these extras and you'll get your brake pads in a box.

 


Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/automotive/763434-grinding-noise-front-end-vehicle-joint.html#ixzz2XYPGRzH7

 

 

I contend that greed is not good, and it often causes real harm to the economy, instead of fueling it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon Gecko famously said that greed is good. Some believe it is the only thing that makes an economy function. However, look how it affects the auto repair industry.

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/automotive/763434-grinding-noise-front-end-vehicle-joint.html#ixzz2XYPGRzH7

 

 

I contend that greed is not good, and it often causes real harm to the economy, instead of fueling it.

I don't see how this is greed. Just bad business practice that will lead to bankruptcy once exposed and customers can make a choice.

 

Thanks for helping exposé them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greed Isn’t Good: The Lost Lessons of Adam Smith

by Steve Brooks CONTRIBUTING WRITER December 10, 2010
  • Adam Smith expected individuals to set their limits on their own self-interest, through prudence, justice, and benevolence
  • Smith compared unethical behavior to rust in a machine: if it wasn’t paired with self-restraint, self-interest could end up breaking the machine

It’s a short hop from Adam Smith to Gordon Gekko. At least, that’s what most economists would tell you. In his 1776 classic The Wealth of Nations, the father of free-market economics explained how the market’s “invisible hand” transformed private self-interest into public wealth. In the 1987 film Wall Street and its recent sequel, Gordon Gekko summed it up in three words: “Greed is good.”

Both Gekko and those economists got Adam Smith wrong, says Eli Cox, marketing professor at the McCombs School of Business. In a manuscript called Creed of Greed, Cox resurrects a forgotten Smith, a more complex thinker than the free-market cheerleader who gets taught today. Cox contends that Smith’s original conception of self-interest has been distorted by modern economists. He singles out the Chicago School of Economics, and its credo that the only social responsibility of a business is to increase its profits.

“Adam Smith would be appalled by the greediness of people in general,” says Cox. “Smith recognized that unbridled greed can destroy a society, and that even groups of murderers and thieves living together require rules of conduct in order to survive.”

How did Smith get so misunderstood? By reading him out of context, says Cox. Economists cherish passages like this one from The Wealth of Nations: “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

But that book’s 1,080 pages represent less than a third of Smith’s writings, points out Cox. The other two-thirds throw a different light on what Smith meant by self-interest.

As chair of moral philosophy at the University of Glasgow, Smith considered his most important book to be The Theory of Moral Sentiments, published in 1759 and revised up through his death in 1790. In it, he first used the phrase “invisible hand,” describing not economic markets but a deity’s ordering of the moral universe.

In that moral universe, says Cox, Smith expected individuals to set limits on their own self-interest through prudence, justice, and benevolence. The goal of self-love was to provide life’s necessities, not its luxuries, and not to take advantage of other citizens. “Society,” wrote Smith, “cannot exist among those who are at all times ready to hurt and injure one another.”

In contrast, Smith wrote harshly of greed: “What is the end of avarice and ambition. . . . Wealth and greatness are mere trinkets of frivolous value no more able to procure ease of body or tranquility of mind than the tweezers cases of the lover of toys.”

To Adam Smith, concludes Cox, greed was not part of self-interest. He envisioned free markets in which merchants practiced both prudence and fair play. He compared unethical behavior to rust in a machine. If it wasn’t paired with self-restraint, self-interest could end up breaking the machine.

If Smith could view today’s markets, guesses Cox, “He’d be delighted to see the prosperity enjoyed by the world and the extent of free trade.” As a thrifty Scot, though, he’d be dismayed by the rise of fly-by-night investments and credit-card debt. Above all, he would bemoan the decline of business ethics and the rise of greed.

“The best system is a deregulated free-market system, assuming that a critical mass of individuals are trustworthy and play by the rules,” says Cox. “If not, government should and usually does step in. If people will not regulate themselves, government is better than anarchy.

“When one person screws up, a little bit of the freedom of the markets goes away. When people are unethical, they’re hurting the system of free enterprise.”

- See more at: http://www.texasenterprise.utexas.edu/article/greed-isn’t-good-lost-lessons-adam-smith#sthash.HpcdJxD1.dpuf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since nobody believes now is physical eternity , but for argument sake, it is. What is greed? Self preservation in a moment that never stays what it was and the only results that remain are what adapts to never being duplicated twice.

 

List how and why self containment has 4 dimensions yet reality never debates more than 2 hemispheres at a time?

 

All reality does is ask what is best for societal evolution, not genetic continuation.

 

Again, what is greed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how this is greed. Just bad business practice that will lead to bankruptcy once exposed and customers can make a choice.

 

Thanks for helping exposé them.

But what is the driving motivation for those bad business practices? Is it to loose customers? For the sake of cheating? Or to make more money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the problem is...some men are greedier than others. or really, it's not a problem...it's the way evolution works. instead of whining and b*tching about another man's greed, why not have the balls to be greedy and take his $h!t yourself? don't denigrate someone else for being more intelligent and productive than you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon Gecko famously said that greed is good. Some believe it is the only thing that makes an economy function. However, look how it affects the auto repair industry.

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/automotive/763434-grinding-noise-front-end-vehicle-joint.html#ixzz2XYPGRzH7

 

 

I contend that greed is not good, and it often causes real harm to the economy, instead of fueling it.

Ambitious , initiative , yes . Greed no greed is not productive .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ambitious , initiative , yes . Greed no greed is not productive .

if obama wouldn't have bailed out detroit, the "greedy men" would have had to deal with their own mistakes. he did that. corporate welfare is as destructive as individual welfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what is the driving motivation for those bad business practices? Is it to loose customers? For the sake of cheating? Or to make more money?

Short-sighted ness. True greed would have had them think of the big picture instead of immediate gratification. Someone wanting to optimize their wealth knows ethics is highly important to maximizing profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon Gecko famously said that greed is good. Some believe it is the only thing that makes an economy function. However, look how it affects the auto repair industry.

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/automotive/763434-grinding-noise-front-end-vehicle-joint.html#ixzz2XYPGRzH7

 

 

I contend that greed is not good, and it often causes real harm to the economy, instead of fueling it.

 

There's multiple levels of greed, from the greed that motivates "I want better for my children", to the other extreme of stealing the retirement savings of little old ladies.

 

A little greed is good, but a healthy dose of austerity and nationalism would go a whole lot further in fixing some of our actual problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short-sighted ness. True greed would have had them think of the big picture instead of immediate gratification. Someone wanting to optimize their wealth knows ethics is highly important to maximizing profits.

 

That is if they were looking at the big picture. We just don't do that here. If we looked at the big picture we would have a plan for peak oil. We would recycle the rare earth metals in electronics. We would curb pollution rather than deal with expensive clean-ups. We would be investing in wind and solar rather than letting the Chinese get ahead and corner the market.

 

No, they are doing what we Americans always seem to do. Look for the quick money instead of big picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humans are greedy by nature. The issue isn't whether greed itself is good or bad. Determination should be made on how it is focused and balanced.

 

Company A is run by ruthless, greedy men who care nothing for anybody but themselves. They do not benefit anyone else, but eventually that greed will ruin them, destroying the only thing they value.

 

Company B is run by benevolent, socialistic men, who think profit is evil, and ignore all their own greed to care for everyone else except for the profit for the company. Eventually that lack of greed with destroy the company.

 

Company C is run by benevolent, greedy men, who care for profit, but also care for others. They benefit other people, while maintaining a profit, some of which is turned back into the company for expansion, some of which is shared with the associates, and some of which lines their pockets. The balance is the most healthy for the company, and the goodwill of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how this is greed. Just bad business practice that will lead to bankruptcy once exposed and customers can make a choice.

 

Thanks for helping exposé them.

 

And you don't understand that you just prattled articals of faith that are disproved in the real world? The fact is, corporate money buys PR, and PR buys perception. Having thousands of units allows one to buy a LOT of public perception - and the media are not reliable to expose these folks since they count on them for revenues.

 

Humans are greedy by nature. The issue isn't whether greed itself is good or bad. Determination should be made on how it is focused and balanced.

 

Company A is run by ruthless, greedy men who care nothing for anybody but themselves. They do not benefit anyone else, but eventually that greed will ruin them, destroying the only thing they value.

 

Company B is run by benevolent, socialistic men, who think profit is evil, and ignore all their own greed to care for everyone else except for the profit for the company. Eventually that lack of greed with destroy the company.

 

Company C is run by benevolent, greedy men, who care for profit, but also care for others. They benefit other people, while maintaining a profit, some of which is turned back into the company for expansion, some of which is shared with the associates, and some of which lines their pockets. The balance is the most healthy for the company, and the goodwill of others.

 

Rudimentary, and true only in the microcosm. At the level of CAPITALISM (as opposed to free enterprise), the above is false.

 

You see, free enterprise serves the market to dominate the competition. Capitalism CORNERS the market to DESTROY the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The general concensus seems to be that greed is good in moderate doses, while extreme greed can be destructive. I agree with this, but greed is a funny thing, almost like a living animal. A person may not necessarily be greedy, until he/she achieves a little success. If someone goes until they're 40 yrs old never making more than $50k, then suddenly they make $100k/yr, it sometimes awakens a sickness in them, where they feel that they need more and more, and nothing is ever enough. That's the kind of greed that turns ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The general concensus seems to be that greed is good in moderate doses, while extreme greed can be destructive. I agree with this, but greed is a funny thing, almost like a living animal. A person may not necessarily be greedy, until he/she achieves a little success. If someone goes until they're 40 yrs old never making more than $50k, then suddenly they make $100k/yr, it sometimes awakens a sickness in them, where they feel that they need more and more, and nothing is ever enough. That's the kind of greed that turns ugly.

 

100k a year is barely enough to comfortably raise kids with...... You people have some really warped ideas of "greedy" people.... :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capitalism CORNERS the market to DESTROY the competition.

Perhaps sometimes, but more often, IMO, it's led to better products and more diverse inventory when the competition fights back. If there was no competition, prices would skyrocket, and there wouldn't be much reason to create 'the better mousetrap', so to speak.

 

Look at Blockbuster. Cornered the market and drove out the small stores who couldn't compete, but then Redbox pretty much shut them down (B&M anyway), and now we have Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, etc. doing damage to Redbox. And we all benefit with better product. Now I no longer have to get dressed only to find out the store is out of all copies of the movie I want to see, or is closed for the night. I simply open my browser, or fire up my tablet, and there it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ya we do. Too many MORONS attempting to raise kids they can't afford then whining and complaining that their fast food job doesn't pay them $18.00 an hour...... :lol::lol: :lol: :lol::lol:

 

Perhaps these morons should get kickbacks from hospitals for drumming up business for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capitalism CORNERS the market to DESTROY the competition.

 

Comically mis-stated to the point of idiocy.

 

A business might try to corner the market, but cannot do that without the help of government and force of law.

 

Keep government small, and you'll rarely have that problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon Gecko famously said that greed is good. Some believe it is the only thing that makes an economy function. However, look how it affects the auto repair industry.

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/automotive/763434-grinding-noise-front-end-vehicle-joint.html#ixzz2XYPGRzH7

 

 

I contend that greed is not good, and it often causes real harm to the economy, instead of fueling it.

How is that any different than a starving kid in Africa saying the same thing about ur greedy ass?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree - reality knows only the successful recombination of the present genetic matter into a successful adaptation to the future exhibition of existenz...

 

You have one word that doesn't belong. Adaptation needs to be "adoption" of psychological class warfare where the soldiers are called citizens saving humanity. Then those saving society believe they are something from beyond the moment and are educated to remain ruthless, not graceful balances adapting to the moment.

 

Those edcuating reality do not teach understanding what real remains in plain sight as details of the same content never duplicate within this universal self contained position..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...