Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Re: Greed is Bad

Home Forums DISCUSS General Discussion and Questions Greed is Bad Re: Greed is Bad

  • Thu, Oct 29, 2009 - 07:16pm

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1613

    count placeholder

    Re: Greed is Bad

[quote=JK121]Sure buying groceries and all that other stuff does not mutate people but, Self-interest did mutate for Madoff.  His self-interest satisfied himself(producer) and his customer(consumer), but over time he got greedy with an end result he deserves, for he crossed the line from self-interest to greed.

I mean look at Vader, he crossed to the dark side and that did not work out for him.  hahaha[/quote]

Your original question was the generalization:

Could we also argue that self-interest mutates into greed?

Maybe I misunderstood you, the inference is a generalization that “All self-interest mutates into greed.”,  which of course is nonsense.

As I explained before, self-interest is conscious desire and/or act of realizing that desire, provided no-one else is injured.   Greed is the conscious desire and act of realizing that desire, where the presence of force/fraud was used to injure others.

All too often, when one injures another, the element missing in the analysis is, “How did they do it?”  You cited Madoff – he simply modelled his Ponzi scheme off the Social Security System. SurprisedWhen Madoff was caught, all the investors with him were out to torch him.    Undoubtably they were swindled, but Madoff was paying out better returns than the market average!  If something is too good to be true, don’t you get suspicious?  I do.  The subliminal message to the people was, “Madoff got caught!  Therefore, there is nothing corrupt about the system that enabled his greed!” when indeed the banking system, backed by the Fed is indeed immoral and corrupt.  The SEC lulls investors into a false sense of security, even though it was leaked the SEC had first filings on Madoff 10 years ago!   The first commodity to be traded in a regulated market are the regulators.

Madoff’s victims thought they were members of a privileged group, who were lucky enough to invest with a genius like Bernard Madoff.  Some people were lucky enough to be reimbursed by the government for their losses.   Let’s put that another way:  Higher taxes for everyone who didn’t invest with Madoff!

[quote=JK121]As far as Speculators go, they are so far into the realm of greed, they would sell their own mothers for insider trading information.[/quote]

You speculate every single day.  People speculate to increase/decrease their satisfaction/discontent everyday.  Unfortunately, when we use the word “speculator”, it conjures up images of Gecko gaming the system somehow.  We all speculate.  Chris Martenson is speculating the “next 20 years will be completely unlike the last 20 years”.  Is he right?  I happen to agree with him, which is why I am here, but he is speculating as I am by agreeing with him when do my own critical thinking.  Speculating is simply taking a particular path of action based on a risk/reward analysis.  We do this constantly as individuals.  We’d be dead if we didn’t.

Money does reward scarcity, the diamond industry is a perfect example.  Or Cars that can go 200 miles before a single charge or fueling are paralyzed because self-interest was dismantled by greed.  

Please define what you mean by money rewarding scarcity?     If demand outstrips supply on something, this is reflected in a higher price level, but a third cause is monetary inflation.

Which part of the diamond industry?  Industrial diamonds?  Or cosmetic?  If industrial diamonds, I disagree….they are quite abundant, in comparison with gemstone grade diamonds.    Cosmetic?  DeBeers controls the supply of diamonds and created the “Diamond is Forever”.  It’s pretty clever.  They created a demand for something relatively useless.  You know why they can charge such high prices?  Because the market is willing (stupid?) enough to pay it!    DeBeers managed to obtain a monopoly  in the beginning, but thanks to competition coming online from other sources who decided not to join the cartel (Russia, Canada, and Australia spring to mind), the monopoly was broken.

Given a free market, I can think of 4 types of competition:

– Direct: We know this best. Ice company A competes directly with ice company B, C, D, and so forth.

– Indirect: Ice company A competes with beer company B (as ice is usually added to mixed drinks, not beer), people who put those gel-pack thingys in their coolers instead of ice, or the person who makes their own ice at home.

– Dollar: Every product competes with every other pocket for the limited dollars in your pocket. If you spend on product A and have to forsake product B as you don’t have the money, B loses out to A, right?

– Market: Any individual is free to enter or exit the ice business anywhere at any point in time.  There is no cartel or licensing body restricting who can enter the market, that restricts supply and drives up prices.

Now, I’ll concede to all of you that the existing ice businesses would *LIKE* to obtain a monopoly, but, given a free market, how can they obtain it?

Abundance of incremental scarcity in industry creates abundance of wealth. I just figured that was understood.  sorry.  

Huh?   An abundance of scarcity is an abundance of wealth?  Are you conflating wealth with money?  Money is not wealth.  Relative wealth is the relative absence of improvrishment and vice versa.

Want to write more, but gotta make it to the Driving Range and improve my short game.

Have fun!