Does wealth make you greedy?

[Subversive Pessimist]

It may seem like a simple question for many, but I am still asking myself this.

I live in one of the richest countries in the world. People are often depressed, isolated, and there is no love, no feeling of unity between people, except between friends and family. Sometimes, even friendships seems a waste of time. Often, we even don't care for each other.

But often, in poor countries, people have a strong feeling of unity. Strangers invite you to dinner, although they don't have much food left.

My question is simply: Does wealth make people greedy?

[RedAnarchist]

Wealth does make you greedy.

Capitalism is to blame. It encouarges people to be greedy and to value money.

Many who are wealthy may be rich, but they cannot ever be as happy as a person who is rich in knowledge or morality.

[Subversive Pessimist]

Many who are wealthy may be rich, but they cannot ever be as happy as a person who is rich in knowledge or morality.

That's true..

I might have used the wrong words... What I meant was: Does wealth make you unhappy, isolated etc?

Should we force people not to be wealthy?

[redstar2000]

In capitalist society, we are encouraged to "measure ourselves" by our net worth...or by what kinds of "status goods" we have managed to acquire.

This filters down to an amazing degree; among the homeless, an empty refrigerator carton in good condition is a "status object"...it's "almost" like a "house".

But the accumulation of "stuff", however initially rewarding it may be, lacks on-going satisfaction. The only things that we really value are the things that we actually use.

Quite a number of wealthy people try to find something "useful" to do with their wealth...they give it to "worthy causes" of one kind or another.

Some of it may eventually be used for a useful purpose, but it won't be the giver who benefits...all he did was write a check.

What's really missing is the sense of doing worthwhile work; the wealthy have little or no idea even what that is.

So they are not a terribly happy bunch of folks...no matter how much they smile for the cameras.

Paradoxical as it may seem, I'm sure there are some wealthy people who will find communist revolution a great "relief"...the burden of wealth (and the fear for its loss) is lifted from their shoulders forever and now they can find out who they really are and what they can really do.

Just remember not to put them in charge of anything important. :D

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[scrap metal]

Wealth doesn't make you greedy. Greed is human nature. Poverty makes you less greedy. The less greedy you are, the more unity there will be in the community. The less greed in a community, the more likely communism is going to work. Thats why many poor countries attempt to become communism; they realised money isn't important, unity is. When you stop being greedy, it's much easier to share the same wages as everyone else and work toward the common objective of a better tomorrrow.

[Pawn Power]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 02:24 PM

Paradoxical as it may seem, I'm sure there are some wealthy people who will find communist revolution a great "relief"...the burden of wealth (and the fear for its loss) is lifted from their shoulders forever and now they can find out who they really are and what they can really do.

Just remember not to put them in charge of anything important. :D

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
i like this point and agree that after a communist revolution some of the rich would feel less pressured and eventually be happier people and more productive in society.
long live the revolution

[Subversive Pessimist]

Questions:

How can we seperate needs from desire?

What about those who like driving fast cars in their spare time: Are we going to make cars with different engines etc. or are we just going to make the same old boring model?

[redstar2000]

What about those who like driving fast cars in their spare time: Are we going to make cars with different engines etc. or are we just going to make the same old boring model?

Same old boring model.

On the other hand, simulators will become steadily more elaborate and "realistic".

And a lot cheaper.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[DaCuBaN]

What about those who like driving fast cars in their spare time

Well given that the idea is you gravitate towards doing what you enjoy, it follows that these people would get involved as 'crash test dummies' or test drivers and the like. People still need to build and test automotive transport if the revolution were to come tomorrow.


the same old boring model
Research and development would come to a halt?


How can we seperate needs from desire?

This is in your head. Think about what you actually need. Not much is it ;) Desires shouldn't really even be coming into our life now. This is a very utopian attitude, but if we don't continue with the revolution of the mind, the real revolution will never come

[ComradeRed]

Please, forgive me for not reading the above posts, but I will give my two cents.
"wealth" doesn't make you greedy, BUT the culture one is raised in does; e.g. in a capitalist society one is raised to backstab (in school even!) and that it is justifiable, as long as you "get ahead". Culture is the major influence on what happens later in life, but people always deem it to be human nature. "Wealth" is the reward for exploitation, the pot of gold at the end of the oppressive rainbow, if you will. It is nothing more than the drive to make you wealthy that makes you greedy, but not the wealth itself.

[Invader Zim]

in a simple word yes.

the more you have the more you want.

also as redstar said, capitalist society actively encourages greed.

[scrap metal]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 02:09 PM
in a simple word yes.

the more you have the more you want.

Are you implying that (with this same logic) the terminally poor want nothing because they have nothing?

[Raisa]

Originally posted by scrap [email protected] 21 2004, 04:51 PM
Wealth doesn't make you greedy. Greed is human nature. .
How is greed human nature and not just the result of a selfish system?

Wealth doesnt make you greedy, it helps you be ignorant to the struggles of other people.

LA LA LA LA i cant hear you i have money in my ears!

[h&s]

You talk of the burden of wealth being released from rich people being a good thing, but the thing is that the greed that got them that wealth will just manifest itself somewhere else.
As you correctly said the capitalist system does promote greed - just look at debt sorry, loan, adverts.
They say things like "why have it later when you can have it now?"
This is just pure greed and needs to be completly eradicated.:marx::hammer:

[redstar2000]

...but the thing is that the greed that got them that wealth will just manifest itself somewhere else.

I have no "hard numbers" to offer here, but my strong impression is that the vast majority of people that we would consider seriously wealthy (say the top 10% of the American pyramid) inherited their wealth...or at least the "stake" they used to gather additional wealth.

I also have the strong impression that most of these people do not actively participate in the accumulation of additional wealth; their fortunes are in the hands of "financial advisers", "business agents", "money managers", "trustees", etc.

They would find it disturbing, no doubt, to find themselves "demoted" to the level of ordinary workers. And given their class backgrounds, some of them will no doubt experience a "renewed commitment" to shameless greed.

But I don't think that's "inevitable".

We'll see.


They say things like "why have it later when you can have it now?".
This is just pure greed and needs to be completely eradicated.

No, actually it's a different kind of "greed" than that associated with capitalists as a class.

"Having it now instead of later" is really an appeal to status, I think. The worker who goes deeply into debt to "have nice things" is really saying something along the lines of "just because I'm a worker doesn't mean that I have to live in shit".

When that worker's friends come to visit or s/he brings a potential new boy/girlfriend home, the message is "I'm something, not nothing".

If, in addition, the "status good" also has an explicit use value -- say a large "home entertainment center" or a new computer -- then that makes "having it now" even more appealing and even less connected with abstract "greed".

We would certainly eliminate all advertising save for that necessary to inform people that certain goods and services exist.

But to some extent at least, most people will prefer to see themselves and have others see them as people "who live well" and not people who "wallow in squalor".

I'm not sure that it's possible to "eradicate" that.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[h&s]

I disagree with some of what you've said. Desire for a "better" social status is greed as social status is governed by how wealthy you are, so the higher up you are the richer you get.
I agree with the rest.

[percept¡on]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 01:50 AM

...but the thing is that the greed that got them that wealth will just manifest itself somewhere else.

I have no "hard numbers" to offer here, but my strong impression is that the vast majority of people that we would consider seriously wealthy (say the top 10% of the American pyramid) inherited their wealth...or at least the "stake" they used to gather additional wealth.

You're right:

"A look at the people on the Forbes list of the richest people in the country begins to tell a story. In examination of the backgrounds of people on the 1997 list, United for a Fair Economy found that 42% of those in this select group inherited sufficient wealth to place them there. Another 6% started with inheritances of $50 million or more, and 21% came from at least "wealthy or upper class backgrounds." The remaining 31% of the Forbes elite did reach their positions without any apparent head start, indicating some significant mobility but no startling turnover of those at the top."

From "Horatio Alger Lives?" by Arthur MacEwan

[h&s]

I wasn't talking about the richest people, just those with hich wages who live in the rich suburbs. I don't know about the rich of America, I was talking from expierience about the rich of the UK.