Greed is good

[Left Coast]

I have two young daughters, one 7 and the other 8. The 7 year old is the sweetest most kind person I know, she lets her older sister have all the toys. At school, she gives the other kids all her book fair money, she is outspoken, energetic and the most active, outspoken person in her class. The teacher loves her. She looks just like a mini Reese Witherspoon.

The 8 year old is greedy. She claims all the toys, she keeps to herself at school, and is actually showing signs of being a hoarder. Which scares me a little honestly, because my dads uncle was a full blown hoarder, and we emptied his house after he passed, and I think it should have been in the guinness book of world records.

...Anyways, the 7 year old has absolutely no self-preservation qualities. She will literally skip in front of a car, and seems oblivious to potential dangers. The older one is very aware of potential dangers.

My hypothesis is that greediness is good for individuals because it is self-preserving. Kindness is bad foe individuals because it is self-sacrificing.

With governance, I would choose a conservative, self-preserving one. Thus, the greedier the politician, the better

Self-interest and altruism should be balanced, ideally. It's not feasible in the long-run to be selfish, because eventually you will run out of friends and people to support you when you need it, and you'll likely find yourself lonely and miserable. We're a social species that has evolved to thrive through cooperation and interdependence. Of course, this means you also cannot be completely selfless otherwise it will likely end up hurting you (the airplane oxygen mask principle).

 

[oldbadger]

My hypothesis is that greediness is good for individuals because it is self-preserving. Kindness is bad foe individuals because it is self-sacrificing.

Christian? ...... Much? .......
You think that Jesus was a fool?
....... interesting.

With governance, I would choose a conservative, self-preserving one. Thus, the greedier the politician, the better

Good luck with all that corruption, then.

 

[suncowiam]

There is no need for greed, now. The Earth provides plenty of essential resources for all the humans on it. Yet because of our greed, we aren't willing to distribute those resources equitably, causing many of our fellow humans to struggle for their survival. And for we humans, there is more to it than just survival. We are not just dumb animals, surviving from one generation to the next, we are metaphysical beings consciously living life, and thereby needing more than just the bare essentials 'to live'.

That's not true. If there was then poverty wouldn't exist. So explain that, if we have unlimited resources as you suggest?

 

[Left Coast]

That's not true. If there was then poverty wouldn't exist. So explain that, if we have unlimited resources as you suggest?

...are you serious?

Economic inequality - Wikipedia

PS he didn't claim resources were "unlimited."

 

[suncowiam]

...are you serious?

Economic inequality - Wikipedia

PS he didn't claim resources were "unlimited."

You didn't follow the original comment.

Economic inequality wouldn't exist if there were unlimited resources. Follow the original context and don't chime in into the middle of a conversation unless you know the whole context.

Greed exists because of limited resources. It does not matter even if one could evenly distribute the limited resources. "Enough" is a subjective term to apply to everyone.

 

[LuisDantas]

I have two young daughters, one 7 and the other 8. The 7 year old is the sweetest most kind person I know, she lets her older sister have all the toys. At school, she gives the other kids all her book fair money, she is outspoken, energetic and the most active, outspoken person in her class. The teacher loves her. She looks just like a mini Reese Witherspoon.

The 8 year old is greedy. She claims all the toys, she keeps to herself at school, and is actually showing signs of being a hoarder. Which scares me a little honestly, because my dads uncle was a full blown hoarder, and we emptied his house after he passed, and I think it should have been in the guinness book of world records.

...Anyways, the 7 year old has absolutely no self-preservation qualities. She will literally skip in front of a car, and seems oblivious to potential dangers. The older one is very aware of potential dangers.

My hypothesis is that greediness is good for individuals because it is self-preserving. Kindness is bad foe individuals because it is self-sacrificing.

With governance, I would choose a conservative, self-preserving one. Thus, the greedier the politician, the better

Honestly, I have to wonder how come think they are talking seriously at such times.

 

[Left Coast]

You didn't follow the original comment.

Yes, I did. He did not argue that Earth's resources were unlimited, only that they were sufficient to meet everyone's needs.

But there's an easy solution to resolve this. If @PureX thinks the Earth's resources are unlimited, he can say so. If I was wrong, I'll gladly apologize to you.

Economic inequality wouldn't exist if there were unlimited resources.

Your view seems to be that poverty is an inevitable result of the fact that Earth's resources are limited. I see no evidence for this, but you're welcome to show me some. What I see is a world where some people have quite a few resources, more than they could ever use, and other people do not have enough to even survive. I also see that this inequitable distribution of resources is a result of entirely voluntary policy decisions by governments.

 

[suncowiam]

Yes, I did. He did not argue that Earth's resources were unlimited, only that they were sufficient to meet everyone's needs.

But there's an easy solution to resolve this. If @PureX thinks the Earth's resources are unlimited, he can say so. If I was wrong, I'll gladly apologize to you.


Your view seems to be that poverty is an inevitable result of the fact that Earth's resources are limited. I see no evidence for this, but you're welcome to show me some. What I see is a world where some people have quite a few resources, more than they could ever use, and other people do not have enough to even survive. I also see that this inequitable distribution of resources is a result of entirely voluntary policy decisions by governments.

Poverty in it's simplest definition, or a synonym, is a lack of resources. Agreed? Let's not inflate this debate any further.

 

[Left Coast]

Poverty in it's simplest definition, or a synonym, is a lack of resources. Agreed? Let's not inflate this debate any further.

Sure, I'm willing to go with that. A lack of personal resources, not total available resources.

 

[suncowiam]

Sure, I'm willing to go with that. A lack of personal resources, not total available resources.

Ok, and if I then now said that poverty wouldn't exist if personal resources were unlimited, is there still a debate?

Mathematically, any resources that are considered unlimited then it's subsets are considered unlimited or infinite. So your technicality doesn't actually account for much.

 

[Left Coast]

Ok, and if I then now said that poverty wouldn't exist if personal resources were unlimited, is there still a debate?

I believe the debate is whether existence of unlimited resources is the only way that poverty would not exist. I'm not convinced that's the case.

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe the debate is whether existence of unlimited resources is the only way that poverty would not exist. I'm not convinced that's the case.

This that you say should be obvious to everyone. But apparently not.

 

[PureX]

That's not true. If there was then poverty wouldn't exist. So explain that, if we have unlimited resources as you suggest?

Greed is the explanation. Everyone hoards and piles up more than they need if they are able to get hold of it. And that leaves everyone else coming up short. How can you not see this going on all around you?

 

[PureX]

Yes, I did. He did not argue that Earth's resources were unlimited, only that they were sufficient to meet everyone's needs.

But there's an easy solution to resolve this. If @PureX thinks the Earth's resources are unlimited, he can say so. If I was wrong, I'll gladly apologize to you.

No one in their right mind actually believes that the Earth's resources are unlimited.

 

[suncowiam]

I believe the debate is whether existence of unlimited resources is the only way that poverty would not exist. I'm not convinced that's the case.

I never asserted that.

 

[Left Coast]

I never asserted that.

Mkay. Then do you assert that the reason for poverty is because there aren't sufficient resources to meet everyone's needs?

 

[suncowiam]

Mkay. Then do you assert that the reason for poverty is because there aren't sufficient resources to meet everyone's needs?

Jeez. Poverty would not exist if there were unlimited resources.

How many times do you need to rephrase what I said?

 

[Left Coast]

Jeez. Poverty would not exist if there were unlimited resources.

OK, if that's the only point you are making then I don't care. I care if you claim that in our world of limited resources that poverty must exist.

 

[suncowiam]

OK, if that's the only point you are making then I don't care. I care if you claim that in our world of limited resources that poverty must exist.

That was my original point.

Because of limited resources, poverty CAN exist. It correlates with the population. The higher the population, the higher the chance for poverty.

Sure, poverty exists today because we do not have unlimited resources. All the ideas in the world cannot prevent poverty either because of greed. Greed exists because there are limited resources.

We can force others to share their resources but then we have to accept the ideology of force, which I do not. I'll gladly accept a proposition against poverty without the use of force. Care to offer one?

 

[Left Coast]

That was my original point.

Because of limited resources, poverty CAN exist. It correlates with the population. The higher the population, the higher the chance for poverty.

Is there any peer reviewed analysis that actually demonstrates that correlation? It strikes me as obviously untrue.

Sure, poverty exists today because we do not have unlimited resources. All the ideas in the world cannot prevent poverty either because of greed. Greed exists because there are limited resources.

We can force others to share their resources but then we have to accept the ideology of force, which I do not. I'll gladly accept a proposition against poverty without the use of force. Care to offer one?

That depends if you take the libertarian stance that things like taxes and other government policy interventions are "force." If you do, then I don't know where in the world you expect to live, because I don't know of any functional societies that don't have a government which exerts some regulatory control over their economy.

If you don't, I think things like a more progressive tax system, making the minimum wage a living wage, and investing more in public education would help.