Humans are Inherently greedy

[Drvladivostok]

All of human institutions are a reflection of our psychology, law is a reflection of Fear and the desire for security, Governance is just a very advance primordial group identity that surpass the Dunbar's ratio, Religion is quite same as governance (If you happen to be muslim) but difference in regulating private matters.

Economies are about our desire for self-interest, have you ever thought that the grand economic problem that is apparently unsolvable is slightly silly? How come we have limited recourse with unlimited desire? The second part of that conjuncture sounds like cowshit, if you quantify all the desired consumption of an average human in their lifetime and multiply that to the amount of recourse available would did you just win a Nobel Prize or something?

Here's a thought experiment do you really need the PC/laptop you're looking at right now? What if you have less RAM, less powerful VGA, or maybe much worse: No RGB Keyboard!! Despite these absolute cruelty to your being you'd probably live, your live expectancy might even increase since you'd enjoy sitting your ass down every day and maybe workout or something.

Let's take it to the next level; imagine you don't have all the luxury of riding in a public transport, or a A/C or no electricity in Fridays, I mean why do you even need them? or want them? Some of this things doesn't even increase life expectancy. Your ancestor did just fine living on huts, our historical records isn't full of people complaining that they didn't have internet.

Because you are greedy, the same psychological principle that compels you to increase your supposed living quality beyond its need is something which is by definition Excessive, increase in income beyond $200,000 doesn't increase living quality, neither does a increase in computer ram above 32 Gb, neither does RGB Keyboards. The same principle that makes you want the RGB Keyboards are the same psychological principles that makes Millionaires become Billionaires. I mean you might as well live like a Billionaire compared to your ancestor.

greed·y
/ˈɡrēdē/

Adjective:
a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (such as money).

ex·ces·sive
/ikˈsesiv/

Adjective:
more than is necessary, normal, or desirable; immoderate.

Now my only homework is to proof whether or not we are selfish, here's another Fun experiment: Go to a Restaurant and say you're Hungry to the waitress, if she refuse to give you food try robbing the store, but probably the best way is to offer her some shekels. How come she's so greedy while you're going hungry? Is she a Jew? (Btw, is this degree of ironic anti-Semitism allowed in this site? if not let me know I'll edit it out).

The Market Economy is (Excuse my Capitalist Propaganda here) is a machine in which is a reflection of our psychological needs of self interest, to quote our Lord and Saviour Adam Smith; it is not by the charity of the Butcher, the Baker, and the Ironsmith that we can enjoy their goods, but by their own self interest. How dare those greedy degenerates look out for their own self interest, How come? Bezos was probably a Greedy Motherfucker for wanting to gain those extra Billions but hey, I got my new RGB Keyboards because of him, and you can too!!

Counterargument: Are we all going to hell? No, unless you happen to be a Calvinist.

 

[Hadoblado]

Humans are not inherently greedy. Humans are adaptive. Excessive drive to accumulate wealth is a result of self-comparison. If there were only one billionaire in the world with no competition for the title, they probably wouldn't care about accumulating wealth anymore because they already 'won'. The moment there are two billionaires you'll get an arms race.

 

[birdsnestfern]

I don't know, not all are driven by greed though, some are.

These days everything is so scarce, that the competition is about job positions and scraping by.

People in high places seem to have too much power and that's where the root of corruption starts. The culture of competition makes people greedy because they fear there is not enough for everyone.

For the ordinary person, value can be found in chosing what you want to do, and making life enjoyable. Easy to balance excess by giving away excess.

Its a game of survival out there. Greed can be in money, love, recognition, power, attention, food, shopping excess, religious superiority, race superiority, and its because there is a belief that there is not enough for everyone and the weakness wants to feel powerful and secure so it stockpiles more than it needs.

Just share because how it really works is that abundance should be everyones right and then it should also be shared to create a circular energy of what goes around comes around.

Mostly you will see greed in the fat at the top.

 

[ZenRaiden]

NT according to kersey look for objective measure for performance. Both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet grew up middle upper class in a individualistic capitalist culture where money equals societal,cultural, benefit.
To say this is greed would be a kind of christian fundementalist thing at best and honestly I don't think US people consider rich people evil on average. Though that is just opinion.
Competitive mind set is just a comparative measure but honestly I don't think they are the reason for billionairs. I think they are simply Result of system. Though of course that does not mean people cannot be greedy.
And I would say the system is in ways made not to stop greed. If you look at the rich, chances are they could have the power to leverage systems for their own benefit and sink others.
Saturated markets are vertical hierarcies with pecking order almost like Indian class system.
So there are kind of levels where you need a certain mindset to break the barriers and accumulate wealth.
Communist narrative always was this result of greed.
Communist cynicism however was equal in measure as US cynicism towards communist.
This was however result of rivarly not objective knowledge. Given that Russia is 30 years in capitalism and the narratives are equally same.

 

[Drvladivostok]

Humans are not inherently greedy. Humans are adaptive. Excessive drive to accumulate wealth is a result of self-comparison. If there were only one billionaire in the world with no competition for the title, they probably wouldn't care about accumulating wealth anymore because they already 'won'. The moment there are two billionaires you'll get an arms race.

That makes human inherently Envious and circumstantially Greedy (I guess we are going to hell), it only proves my point is wrong circumstantially, I might be right, but in going to practice in proofing your hypothesis I might as well be, humans are social animal the lowest amount that there have been on Earth is two, but their excessive consumption of a certain fruit product being motivated by eachother might strenghthen your point.

 

[BurnedOut]

Before I write a proper explication, I want to add that humans functioning on greed was inherently better than humans functioning on false hope. With greed, you have a direct interface to someone's behaviors. With false hopes, there cannot be any prognosis done because the line between greed and the illusion of self empowerment is legally and societally blurred at this point - the capitalistic economy and personality

 

[Black Rose]

Females inherently want to feed their kids. The tribe functions this way.

Sharing is inherent until starvation happens.

Only modern culture strives,

 

[Hadoblado]

Humans are not inherently greedy. Humans are adaptive. Excessive drive to accumulate wealth is a result of self-comparison. If there were only one billionaire in the world with no competition for the title, they probably wouldn't care about accumulating wealth anymore because they already 'won'. The moment there are two billionaires you'll get an arms race.

That makes human inherently Envious and circumstantially Greedy (I guess we are going to hell), it only proves my point is wrong circumstantially, I might be right, but in going to practice in proofing your hypothesis I might as well be, humans are social animal the lowest amount that there have been on Earth is two, but their excessive consumption of a certain fruit product being motivated by eachother might strenghthen your point.

No, humans are adaptable.

Not all humans are envious, but our societies are structured to reward those who find a way to stand out.

When you make strong claims about what humans are or are not, can or cannot be, you're building yourself a prison for your perspective. Humans are insanely flexible in how they approach things. If humans were so predictable, psychology would be a much harder science.

 

[Daddy]

I think it depends.

If I invented the replicator machine from Star Trek and made it really cheap to make and produce, then people could just fabricate everything they wanted and everyone would potentially be better off for it.

On the other hand, most humans seem to be like Andrew Tate - - "You don't make money; you can only take money from other people." They want wealth at the expense of other people. They don't understand the moral difference between creating cheap goods on the market and just having or taking more money from other people. They are greedy, yes. Unfortunately, capitalism encourages this kind of thinking. And it's the flaw of capitalism that anti-communists don't ever want to talk about.

I think capitalism would be less flawed, if employees and citizens had more ownership in startup companies and instead valued them for creating more wealth for everyone via cheaper and easier to produce goods. You could still give people more money for spearheading these projects, but it shouldn't be about just creating an income stream or it's bullshit "take advantage of people" capitalism.

 

[Puffy]

It’s hard to tell. We live in a culture driven by self-interest so it’s a biased environment to reach that conclusion in.

 

[Drvladivostok]

No, humans are adaptable.

Humans are adeptable to the degree that it doesn't contradict our Biological design, and there are certain paterns of that Biological design that can be recohnized. Imagine it like a Psychological niche that has to be filled with external stimuli, we fill niche for Primordialism with families, language, believe, the believe and identity is flexible as long as it satisfies the psychological niche. You can speak a variations of language, believe in any ideology, love anyone, but it has to be something.

Societies are even less flexible, humans can have crazy psychological Niche that is self destructive, but in order for it to reflect in a society it has to be dominant enough, people can have depression and existential crises, but I don't remember any civilisations that has ever nuked itself to oblivion, a human can be an Atheist, never a society.

In that regards, humans have an instinct of self preservation like an in built program, in a personal level we reflect that in our behaviour I mentioned above; unlimited desire, in a societal level it manifest it many ways, while the individual need is self preservation the societal goal is Prosperity, either through killing the rich or by the Invisible hand of God. Cultural wars are like Darwinian selection; the best one comes out on top while the weak is oblitirated from the mind-pool.

Our society doesn't reward people who stand out, nature rewards people who are self interested in a system where no Greed is allowed and greedy people are murdered people overproduce their economic products to get extra ration irrespective of efficiency, party member backstab and shoot eachother, and Children rat on their Parents to the NKVD. People doesn't change, the system is just incompatible because it forces those poor russians to channel their greed in societally destructive ways.

 

[PiedPiper]

The question isn't whether humans as a whole are inherently greedy, but whether given an ideal set of circumstances, delivered at the right time, with the right environment, would they continue down the trajectory of butchery.
To assume the entire race is corrupted by greed might be a bit of an overstatement. Despite this, it is the natural way in which this society functions, and the psychopaths are by default the main powers that be. It always seems to be one little piss ant who ruins it for the rest. And of course, these same psychos are leading along the mass of sheeple rather willingly. Woefully they have the advantage, they will take measures others will not, and set the standards of our culture. Generosity is punished severely, by those willing to exploit it. Avarice is simply willing to make the sacrifice to achieve affluence and authority. You see the dilemma.

Assume the world population was reduced drastically, perhaps 100,000 living persons, well now you have more quality/ need for diversity/ unique cliques. The pain of it is we are hardwired to continue re-producing instead of balancing our resources and peculiarity of life. I think I would have to agree with you there @Drvladivostok in view of the fact we don't know when to stop in our pursuits. Vanity is us. In smaller poor communities' crime is amped up Moreso, because there is a need, and the need is unmet by the whole community. If we were to disperse an adequate amount of wealth between all, I surmise the rate of crime would lower (with only a few inherently greedy individuals stealing from the rest, and that is how it starts.)

Not everyone is on the same par level of rapacity as every other, but all need and want to live well. I hardly see the human race grasping this concept enough to bring to an end our inherent nature. Which is to gain and to progress, to our own detriment. And even if you had 20 humans unable to reproduce, there would still remain one of those who had the highest level of selfishness willing to take from the others. But i'm a fatalist.

 

[dr froyd]

yes, humans are greedy power-hungry mofos. That's why you need separation of powers, institutions without harmful incentives, and free markets.

unfortunately, nowadays there is no place on the planet that truly believes in free markets. US, for example, is a cronyist country with politicians like Nancy Pelosi with an (official) net worth in excess of $130 million. Free-market capitalism was in vogue in the 80s when it pulled the developed world out of the stagflationary hell of the 70s, but has largely been thrown in the trash after the 2008 crisis, and perhaps to some extent even earlier in the post-LTCM collapse in the late 90s when central-bank interventionism became the norm that we are still living by today.

if we are lucky, the stagflationary hell we are moving inexorably towards today will reveal its real culprits; misallocation of resources based on fanciful dreams of net-zero-emission energy, flawed hyper-interventionist monetary policy, and profligate fiscal policies.

i guess this was another bit of capitalist propaganda, sorry bout that

 

[Drvladivostok]

The question isn't whether humans as a whole are inherently greedy, but whether given an ideal set of circumstances, delivered at the right time, with the right environment, would they continue down the trajectory of butchery.

I think you shouldn't attribute a negative connotation toward 'greed', humans are by nature always desire what is excessive of their need, this isn't anything bad, without this desire we wouldn't be able to have any improvement in any living quality like the Internet, Electricity, and Televisions (Well maybe not TV), had people feel content with what they need and doesn't pursue more we'd be an entirely different species.

However there is a certain line where the ethimological greed is passed and the moral event horizon of morality is ignored which leads way to actual negative greed, since those two things are hard to distunguish based on degrees but a rather principle difference we should call them by different term; Good Greed is called Self Interest, while Bad Greed is called Avarice (You might be thinking I'm taking the Capitalist Kool-Aid, and you might be right, but it doesn't mean I'm wrong).

The principle difference is that Avarice directly incite upon other people a loss for your excessive gain, like you taking a cookie from your sister even though mom gave you one each, that is by definition excessive and cause a direct loss, while self interest is done without the element of loss and when done in a free-market and in a consensual setting each person benefit. (Again excuse my shameless propaganda) I mean the only reason why anyone would sell anything to anybody is because that purchase is worth more for the seller to sell the item than to keep it, while for the consumer the item is worth more than the money he purchase it for, otherwise he wouldn't buy it; Win-win, something2 about Gordon Gecko Quote.

If God made us in his design he certainly won't make a broken toy to throw to the incinerator, it's how to utilize the feature, not the feature itself that's wrong, I don't know any religion that forbids sales, well, except one.

Generosity is punished severely, by those willing to exploit it.

Only when you are Generous toward Avaricious people, a rarity based on my experience. But hey you can always be Self-Interested.

If we were to disperse an adequate amount of wealth between all, I surmise the rate of crime would lower (with only a few inherently greedy individuals stealing from the rest, and that is how it starts.)

Good intentions doesn't equate Good result, the problem first and foremost is how to aleviate poverty, governments which soul ideology was for equality just made everyone miserable.

 

[PiedPiper]

The question isn't whether humans as a whole are inherently greedy, but whether given an ideal set of circumstances, delivered at the right time, with the right environment, would they continue down the trajectory of butchery.

I think you shouldn't attribute a negative connotation toward 'greed', humans are by nature always desire what is excessive of their need, this isn't anything bad, without this desire we wouldn't be able to have any improvement in any living quality like the Internet, Electricity, and Televisions (Well maybe not TV), had people feel content with what they need and doesn't pursue more we'd be an entirely different species.

However there is a certain line where the ethimological greed is passed and the moral event horizon of morality is ignored which leads way to actual negative greed, since those two things are hard to distunguish based on degrees but a rather principle difference we should call them by different term; Good Greed is called Self Interest, while Bad Greed is called Avarice (You might be thinking I'm taking the Capitalist Kool-Aid, and you might be right, but it doesn't mean I'm wrong).

The principle difference is that Avarice directly incite upon other people a loss for your excessive gain, like you taking a cookie from your sister even though mom gave you one each, that is by definition excessive and cause a direct loss, while self interest is done without the element of loss and when done in a free-market and in a consensual setting each person benefit. (Again excuse my shameless propaganda) I mean the only reason why anyone would sell anything to anybody is because that purchase is worth more for the seller to sell the item than to keep it, while for the consumer the item is worth more than the money he purchase it for, otherwise he wouldn't buy it; Win-win, something2 about Gordon Gecko Quote.

If God made us in his design he certainly won't make a broken toy to throw to the incinerator, it's how to utilize the feature, not the feature itself that's wrong, I don't know any religion that forbids sales, well, except one.

Generosity is punished severely, by those willing to exploit it.

Only when you are Generous toward Avaricious people, a rarity based on my experience. But hey you can always be Self-Interested.

If we were to disperse an adequate amount of wealth between all, I surmise the rate of crime would lower (with only a few inherently greedy individuals stealing from the rest, and that is how it starts.)

Good intentions doesn't equate Good result, the problem first and foremost is how to aleviate poverty, governments which soul ideology was for equality just made everyone miserable.

Yes there is a sort of moral greed and the downside. Always two sides to the coin. I think the government has become so corrupted it has hoarded indescribable wealth over the years, to leave the rest in poverty. The basic #s are 1% owns 99%, and the 99% fight over the remaining 1%. We are a struggling species, and poverty can absolutely be fixed, but why would they commit that wealth to the 'weak' in their opinion, rather than spend it on luxury sedans and advertising. And let's not forget the scientific world, we do need to advance our culture. However, we get a bit carried away with new innovations rather than quality of life, and that's where we fail.

 

[PiedPiper]

yes, humans are greedy power-hungry mofos. That's why you need separation of powers, institutions without harmful incentives, and free markets.

unfortunately, nowadays there is no place on the planet that truly believes in free markets. US, for example, is a cronyist country with politicians like Nancy Pelosi with an (official) net worth in excess of $130 million. Free-market capitalism was in vogue in the 80s when it pulled the developed world out of the stagflationary hell of the 70s, but has largely been thrown in the trash after the 2008 crisis, and perhaps to some extent even earlier in the post-LTCM collapse in the late 90s when central-bank interventionism became the norm that we are still living by today.

if we are lucky, the stagflationary hell we are moving inexorably towards today will reveal its real culprits; misallocation of resources based on fanciful dreams of net-zero-emission energy, flawed hyper-interventionist monetary policy, and profligate fiscal policies.

i guess this was another bit of capitalist propaganda, sorry bout that

Ecologically friendly, vegan safe, vegetarian idealist, global warming clear, cruelty free, child safe, organic, grass fed, rabbit free, hair free wooohooo to go with our genetically enhanced cold starbucks caramel late in the morning.

 

[Drvladivostok]

Sharing is inherent until starvation happens.

There's this quote that I really like about charity; No one ever becomes poor from being charitable, that's because poor people can't afford to be financially generious while the people who are secure enough to be don't do it to the degree that it might damage their financial interest. Sharing only happens when you have your stomach full, all those goody two show propaganda are just propaganda.

Social capitals also serve the self interest, all friends are friends with benefit (Not that kind).

 

[Thurlor]

Greedy compared to what? If greed is the lack or negation of generosity then we are less greedy than any other species of animal. So I am not sure what yard stick you are using to measure our greed.

Are you assuming that everyone else views the world as you do? I don't want to seem rude, but are you greedy and thus assuming all others are also greedy?

Are you measuring us against some unknown perfect alien species?

Are you measuring us against some mythological set of norms?

How do you even know how much a person is 'supposed' to have so as you can determine that they desire too much and are thus being greedy?

 

[PiedPiper]

 

[Drvladivostok]

How do you even know how much a person is 'supposed' to have so as you can determine that they desire too much and are thus being greedy?

By definition one of the fundamental elements of greed is Excess which is by definition more than necesseary or what is needed, the Eskomo live on fishes and seal blubber just fine, what do you actually NEED to live? are you going to argue that each generaton need more recourse individually, that you'd die without your Iphone, no, but you won't say you want to live in fish and Seal Blubber either. That's by definition excess.

A person isn't suppose to want or anything, but their desire is unlimited, as I deliberated above, this is the Economic Problem and have been established for over a century.

This greed has two elements, one; that is self interest, which I mentioned above, and unlimited desire.

 

[Thurlor]

.....what do you actually NEED to live?

So, to be clear, wanting anything more than the bare necessities required to survive (that which we NEED) makes a person greedy?

If that is your definition then you are correct and we are all greedy.

 

[Drvladivostok]

.....what do you actually NEED to live?

So, to be clear, wanting anything more than the bare necessities required to survive (that which we NEED) makes a person greedy?

If that is your definition then you are correct and we are all greedy.

Not just wanting more than bare necceseaty, but an unlimited desire, wanting more than is needed is just a side effect, the dillema is a geometric growth, give a person a person a Car he wants a nicer car, he wants more money, more of everything, if living quality is what is desired than no person would be richer above $200.000 dollars.

Make someone a Millionare he'll wanna be a Billionare.

 

[dr froyd]

there's no way that 200k is where well-being returns have diminished completely though. If you make 200k you get what - maybe 10k per month after tax? It would still take you many years to buy a nice house, for example.

 

[scorpiomover]

Economies are about our desire for self-interest, have you ever thought that the grand economic problem that is apparently unsolvable is slightly silly? How come we have limited recourse with unlimited desire?

Here's a thought experiment do you really need the PC/laptop you're looking at right now?

If economies are about self-interest, is it really in our self-interest to keep spending our lives just focussed on having more? Isn't "A Xmas Carol" about how Scrooge spends his life focussed on having more and more money, at the expense of having love, a family and having a happy life? So from the perspective of self-interest, it makes more sense to limit our potential for greed, for our own benefit.

 

[Drvladivostok]

Economies are about our desire for self-interest, have you ever thought that the grand economic problem that is apparently unsolvable is slightly silly? How come we have limited recourse with unlimited desire?

Here's a thought experiment do you really need the PC/laptop you're looking at right now?

If economies are about self-interest, is it really in our self-interest to keep spending our lives just focussed on having more? Isn't "A Xmas Carol" about how Scrooge spends his life focussed on having more and more money, at the expense of having love, a family and having a happy life? So from the perspective of self-interest, it makes more sense to limit our potential for greed, for our own benefit.

To certain degree we already do limit this primordial desire, Self Interest and human connections aren't mutually exclusive, we don't gather and socialize with our families in wooden huts or caves, we can do both, but self interest HAS to be fulfilled.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Define greed

 

[Drvladivostok]

Define greed

Read my post.