Originally Posted by
Bob Parmenter
Pete, my memory may be wrong on this, but I think you're relatively new to this type of discussion here. Good that you throw your hat in the ring, don't want to discourage that.
I use certain words with purpose/intent just to see what comes out in discussion, and in the reply to you above, one of the key words was "voluntary" in reference to trade. If trade is done in a voluntary way, greed is pretty much impossible. I know, that's not how our national discussion frames the use of the word greed, but again, I talk about "honest ovall look". So, if I may, let me shape the discussion in a way that doesn't serve the political/elite class. Those evil, wealthy owners and share holders of Wal Mart, to my knowledge, don't run out into the street and put a gun to someones head and force them to shop at their stores. The owners/investors put their earnings on the line first, without guarantee that anyone will walk through the door and exchange value (most often money so far) for what they have. The take a risk, and if they offer sufficient value, people will voluntarily walk through the door and exchange value. Likewise for the employees (not just of WalMart, this is the same for any job). Walmart doesn't have the power to conscript anyone, in other words, force them to work for Walmart. Again, the owners/investors put their earnings on the line first to crate the business, build the store, stock it, equip it to make transactional trades, and then have to find people to serve the other people (customers). They offer the jobs at XX dollars per hour (or whatever wage calculating structure). If they were being unreasonable in their offering of a wage, nobody, or insufficient numbes of bodies, would apply. To my knowledge, good economy or bad, they've never had a shortage of applicants, so base on how long the line of applicants is, the free market place says they're offering a realistic wage for the skill level necessary. Again, I'll point out this is a general overview, while there may be some specific examples where this system doesn't work I would point out those are extreme exceptions, not the norm. So, to summarize, Walmart doesn't force customers to do business with them, and employees aren't forced to work for them. All three parties are trading what they have of value (condumer products, money or time/skill in this example) with each other on a voluntary basis, no extortion, not threats of jail time or fines, no forcing someone to do something against their will that will harm them. I fail to see where a realistic definition of greed could come from that.
On the other hand, just to be current, and again tweaking the mainstream view that may have alternate objectives, let's look at what real greed looks like. Let's say you have a young woman who is living a comparatively affluent life. She doesn't have to work, but she is working on a potentially high paying job through the educational path she's chosen for herself. She demands that someone else pay for he "wants" in life. I emphasize wants from needs as in, food is a necessity of life, sex, albeit enjoyable and good for the psyche, is not a life or death necessity for the participant. Yet here this young woman is, demanding that someone else pay for her protection from the outcomes of her decision to, apparently based on how much she claims it will cost, play....... a lot........ at no economic cost to her. Further, she's demanding that government make her fellow productive citizens pay for it. Since government is a service to the citizens, and as such doesn't produce anything that expands value (yes, they may assist the citizens to expand value, but only after those citizens create value first that can be taxed)they have to take away value from those who earn it, to transfer to those who haven't, such as this young woman. And if you don't want to do that as the original earner, you will be penalized by fine or jail........in other words, you're not in a voluntary transaction, you're forced to pay for her wants. I would suggest to you that she's the one exhibiting greed. She wants to get value from citizen A to suit her life choice without giving anything in return.....................well............she's giving something of value, but not likely to those who ultimately pay for it.:rolleyes:;)