I've realized I just don't understand greed

[Brick]

I remember reading or watching something years ago about the movie and how before it, the actual Wall Street was nothing like the movie portrays (ie a bunch of guys in nice suits making millions upon millions), but after it came out it inspired all those Wall St. guys to want to be like that, and now it's been ruined for a generation. I think that's a bit different than your average bro going, "yeah man, Tyler Durden is pretty cool". Good movie or not it legitimately did have a negative impact on society. Yes people are idiots though. 

[Fizzzzle]

1 hour ago, legend said:

Here's some wild speculation.

 

It's not the money per se. You frame globe trotting and sipping wine for the rest of your days as a great life. That's fine for bursts of time, but quite honestly I'd go mad if that were the rest of my life. Myself, and I suspect many people, enjoy various forms of work and feeling like they're accomplishing something.

 

So now lets run with that mentality. For "rich" people perhaps it's not that they value the money--and really they shouldn't, your life won't get better after a point that is far less than some of these people have--but rather that the money they acquire signifies that they are accomplishing something and are doing well. So they don't stop because they're chasing the feeling of their accomplishment, not the money itself.

 

If this is true, the goal for us as a society is to shift what metrics people use as an indicator of accomplishment. It seems possible at least, because money is not how I measure my own sense of accomplishment. But it's seems clear why it's an easy and obvious route for people to latch onto it.

I think this leads to the conclusion many already have of "getting money out of politics." How that happens and what that exactly means is yet to be determined, let alone how to enforce it, but like I said earlier in the thread... there comes a point where someone is so wealthy that they don't live in the same world as us anymore. They have ascended to Elysium. Kelly Loeffler is one of those people. So is Donald Trump, and quite a few other congressmen. Those people have no business being in government, considering they are deciding policy that they don't have to live by.

 

And, personally, I could not do anything significant for the rest of my life, and I would be happy.

[TwinIon]

1 hour ago, legend said:

Here's some wild speculation.

 

It's not the money per se. You frame globe trotting and sipping wine for the rest of your days as a great life. That's fine for bursts of time, but quite honestly I'd go mad if that were the rest of my life. Myself, and I suspect many people, enjoy various forms of work and feeling like they're accomplishing something.

 

So now lets run with that mentality. For "rich" people perhaps it's not that they value the money--and really they shouldn't, your life won't get better after a point that is far less than some of these people have--but rather that the money they acquire signifies that they are accomplishing something and are doing well. So they don't stop because they're chasing the feeling of their accomplishment, not the money itself.

 

If this is true, the goal for us as a society is to shift what metrics people use as an indicator of accomplishment. It seems possible at least, because money is not how I measure my own sense of accomplishment. But it's seems clear why it's an easy and obvious route for people to latch onto it.

Yeah, I think this is a huge factor.

 

If money equals success and accomplishment, getting more of it is less a way to improve your lifestyle than a way to continue seeking that same personal satisfaction that earing that money gives you. Also, when you have huge amounts of money, generally the best ways to continue making money involve having lots of money, so you're motivated to keep that money in order to earn more of it.

 

 

I think you're right about changing societal metrics, but that's a really hard thing to do. If there was one thing I'd love to see change about the wealthiest people would be to change the fiscal incentives for them to horde their wealth. I don't have a great solution for that, but if we could find a system where billionaires were more incentivized to get rid of their fortunes over a certain point, it could change so much of the wealth gap. A huge bonus would be if they're incentivized to do it either through charity or simply passing more of their profits/wealth back to the whole organization. 

 

[Fizzzzle]

Make a Hollywood walk-of-fame in DC where you get a 10-foot star with your face etched into it for every $100 million you give away while foregoing tax breaks.

[ort]

We need a maximum wage.

[Jason]

2 minutes ago, ort said:

We need a maximum wage.

 

dem capital gains doe

[ort]

I don't know any truly crazy rich people, but the majority of millionaires I know and or have to deal with are all obsessed with money, who has how much money and they are keenly aware of those who have more money. There's definitely a ton of pecking order bullshit going on with these people. Once your basic needs are met 100 times over... and money isn't an issue at all beyond putting limits on just how lavish and luxurious your life will be... weird things happen to the way you view the world.

 

Even worse than those people though? Their kids. Ugh. Don't get me started on that shit. I've had to "work" with more than one "adult" child of these people and they are all worthless. Every one of them.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

THIS is an example of the fascist-populist rhetoric that I've been sounding the alarm over.

 

 

Unless the ultra-rich piggies are made to squeal a little and share some of their obscene levels of wealth the rest of society, then these are the wolves that will be more than happy to feast on us.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

 

 

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Like the conservative populism bit is just naked racism and anti-semitism. Next thing you know he'll be decrying predatory finance capitalism while voting to cut capital gains taxes. Call me when they call for a $15 min wage. 

[cusideabelincoln]

9 hours ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Understanding these folks is not hard. Our social models place outcome based values above all else. Society rarely seriously considers the nature of how success is achieved. These kinds of people are bent toward competitive domination, often without limit. They are willing to do what you are not, rules and people be damned. And society rewards them for this. So the loop completes itself. Its only later that people come along and say, hey, that's kinda fucked up! but noting that something is fucked up is not the same as having an alterative. So "visionaries" will come along to make change and guess who they will hire? that same old group of monsters, er...winners! I meant winners! So terrible people, who have a constant "game on" attitude will always be a part of the puzzle because less psychotic people don't want to be "on" 24/7, because they are normal people!

 

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

― George Bernard Shaw

 

Systemic tribalism, ritualism, heritage, [insert thesaurus entries here]!

 

7 hours ago, legend said:

Here's some wild speculation.

 

It's not the money per se. You frame globe trotting and sipping wine for the rest of your days as a great life. That's fine for bursts of time, but quite honestly I'd go mad if that were the rest of my life. Myself, and I suspect many people, enjoy various forms of work and feeling like they're accomplishing something.

 

So now lets run with that mentality. For "rich" people perhaps it's not that they value the money--and really they shouldn't, your life won't get better after a point that is far less than some of these people have--but rather that the money they acquire signifies that they are accomplishing something and are doing well. So they don't stop because they're chasing the feeling of their accomplishment, not the money itself.

 

If this is true, the goal for us as a society is to shift what metrics people use as an indicator of accomplishment. It seems possible at least, because money is not how I measure my own sense of accomplishment. But it's seems clear why it's an easy and obvious route for people to latch onto it.

 

The shift would have to be to value the emotional attachment to your friends, neighbors, and family.  To be glad in their enjoyment, to encourage it.  To be happy to just share your thoughts, feelings, ideas, and creativity, and to be happy to hear the same in return.

 

7 hours ago, Brick said:

 

And it's because of this movie that a bunch of young Wall Street yuppies decided they wanted to be like Gordon Gekko, so they all emulated him, and now a whole generation has been ruined by a bunch of greedy assholes that will fuck over everyone else, including the economy itself, as long as they get rich. 

 

Fuck that movie, and fuck Oliver Stone for making it. 

 

Ironic enough a person can say literally anything - spew out lies, nonsense, conspiracy theories - and people will believe it so long as it was spoken with confidence, conviction, and/or self-belief.  It doesn't matter if the content of what is spoken is actually right or not - Trump is a prime example of that - so long as the deliverer can bypass the logic of the listener and make them feel something.  This speech is a great example of that because it constrains the scale of "success".  Homo sapiens' totality of evolutionary success, measured against the rest of the species in the world, relied on working together in groups, tribes, and societies, sharing knowledge, and developing the most advanced form of communication among any other species.  This communication accomplished the very opposite of this speech's definition of greed, because this tool allowed us to coordinate and share knowledge at unprecedented levels.  In the "natural" world his argument of greed makes sense if you scale back and refer to humans, as an entire entity, against every other species and taking away their resources for our own success, but what has gotten overlooked in this video clip is that he is talking about human-on-human (corporate-on-corporate) competition, and thus taking away resources from other humans to benefit yourself.  And this is the very distinction young Wall Street yuppies, and most Americans, have missed about our current capitalistic society.

[thewhyteboar]

2 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

 

 

Such a fancy education was wasted on such a fucking dumbass.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

28 minutes ago, thewhyteboar said:

Such a fancy education was wasted on such a fucking dumbass.

And clerked for John Roberts! When he was CJ, not just some dude on the lower circuits

[thewhyteboar]

4 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

And clerked for John Roberts! When he was CJ, not just some dude on the lower circuits

Hawley is the chicken lawyer from Futurama:

But the backwoods asteroid is actually one of the fanciest prep schools in the country.