Without looking at a dictionary, what constitutes greed?
Wanting something beyond need /capacity to use.
I know it when I see it.
Acquiring something for the sake of acquiring it, regardless of need or even desire for it. Worship of possession.
Greed, for lack of a better word, is GOOD. I agree with Gordon Gecko. If we structure our society properly, enlightened self interest leads to the best life for everybody.
Of course, I expect absolutely nobody on this particular message board to agree with me, but there you have it.
That’s a big IF.
I would not disagree with that.
Where do you draw between helpful greed and harmful greed?
If I meet you in a dark alleyway some night and point a gun at you and demand your wallet, I’m motivated by greed to possess more money.
I assume we agree that this is not an example of helpful greed. Is it because I’m breaking the law to satisfy my greed? Because I’ll remind you that Gordon Gecko was also breaking the law to satisfy his greed.
Are you arguing that the methods Gecko used to satisfy his greed shouldn’t have been illegal. If so, why? The movie made it clear that Gecko wasn’t creating any wealth or causing other people to create wealth. He was manipulating the system to collect wealth that other people had created. Nobody benefited from Gecko’s actions except Gecko.
Or perhaps I’m missing your point. Are you suggesting that what Gecko said was true even though what Gecko did was wrong?
If I buy an infrequently used vacation property, am I being obnoxiously greedy? What if I rent it out on a short term basis when I’m not using it? When is greed noxious?
Sent from my Private Jet using Tapatalk Pro
And I’ll add wanting it so someone else can’t have it.
It’s also wanting more than your “fair share.”
Especially with little kids, where the concept of “fair share” is easier to define.
Greed: Wanting something well in excess of your need for it, especially to the point of depriving someone else of said thing.
You’re describing selfishness, of which greed is but one manifestation.
And while selfishness can have positive aspects, greed is a wholly negative manifestation of selfishness.
Greed, by its nature, cannot benefit everyone. It necessitates a worse life for some. Many.
But why would you expect nobody on this particular message board to agree with you?
There’s a pretty diverse group of folks what post here.
Rather than say no one who posts here would agree the previous statement, I’d say rather than a disproportionate % would believe there was any place in public policy for the concept of ‘greed’, per se. I don’t think there is.
A fictional movie speech was given as an example of this debate, a very limited kind of reference to begin with (though a lot of people’s opinions of this sort of thing IME are influenced by movies and TV). But anyway as noted the character Gordon Gecko was breaking securities law, whereas the speech was given on the pretense that he was not. The supposedly honest defense of ‘greed’ was in fact a lie with the speaker fundamentally misrepresenting himself. Big difference between that case and someone who isn’t a law breaker maintaining that ‘greed’ (if/when accumulating wealth really is) within laws written based on traditional concepts of theft* and other crimes is for the common good in the long run.
So I don’t think ‘greed’ has any place as a public policy concept. One should be able to specify traditionally defined crimes, or simply say they don’t really believe in property rights as traditionally defined, not try to justify their political beliefs based on pseudo-moral accusations of ‘greed’ by others.
Even as a personal moral concept I think ‘greed’ is somewhat an artifact of the pre-modern (or pre-Protestant) Christian anti-commercial mindset. It may seem strange that modern anti-religious left people tend to share it, which they often do seems to me, but things like that tend to go around in circles sometimes. I can see valid use of the word in cases like for example, ‘she got greedy trying to take too much of a share of the new profit opportunity and it alienated her business associates who turned to someone else’. But in terms of moral self examination, ‘do I want too many material things?’ I don’t really see it. I don’t happen to be that materialistic by modern American standards (though sure I’m materialistic by monk on a mountaintop standards) but I don’t take seriously moral condemnations of people who want more and more, if they do it within (traditionally defined) laws wrt property rights.
*which is not just any subjective claim that one person’s wealth comes at others’ expense.
Before looking at any of the other responses:
Greed is excessive desire for wealth. Though of course then you have to define “excessive,” and possibly also “wealth.”
Greed involves wanting more than you need or even could use. It involves love of wealth for its own sake, having for the sake of having.
Greed involves wanting, or trying to take, more than your fair share of something, without caring that others might not then have enough.
No, there’s not necessarily any greed involved there.
Are you buying it to have it, or to use it?
Would your acquiring it make it less likely, or more likely, that other people could benefit from it?
It’s when people have more stuff than I do.
Greed is trying to get things that you don’t deserve by taking them from others. Working and building wealth is in no way greed.
I don’t agree that selfishness is ever good. Any attempt to claim it is so relies on then going back to a non-selfish purpose. If we do seemingly selfish things for a non-selfish purpose, then what we are doing isn’t really selfish.
Greed is a particular form of selfishness. It manifests not just as a desire for more than you need, as that is somewhat normal. It is the desire to have wealth for its own sake. For power, or for prestige.
Unfortunately, it is quite popular with people who “build up wealth.” They aren’t doing it, say, to give money to the poor and destitute. They aren’t doing it because they want people to enjoy their product or make people’s lives better. They aren’t even doing it for particular things. They do it just because they want money and the trappings that come with it.
That’s greed. And it is very much a problem in our society. Sure, we do try to shape it into something good, like making it where it’s cheaper to do the right thing. But that’s only because greed is intractable. We have to work with it instead of against it.
The desire to better one’s position is normal and natural and useful. Greed really isn’t–it’s just something we try to work around.
(Though I do note that some happier countries have a concept of not being ostentatious with wealth built in that seems to actually help.)
I’m assuming that the point of the opening question is to define “greed” in a way which explains why most people think of it as a negative or pejorative idea. Gordon Gecko’s definition is simple desire for more than one has.
Most other people have separate words for desire which they approve of, and desire which they do not approve of. Greed is the word for the latter.
I don’t think that’s necessarily true. Suppose I really love paintings. To the point where my desire to own them is insatiable. So I’m constantly commissioning artists to create new paintings for me.
My motivation is clearly greed. But how does my greed hurt anyone? By acting on my greed, I’m supporting the work of a number of artists.
And I’m not selfish. I stage exhibitions so other people can enjoy viewing the paintings I own. I don’t even dictate what subjects the artists I hire should paint. So the overall result of my obsessive greed is there’s more art in the world. Plus several artists have more money. I have less money but I’m happy because I prefer to own the paintings rather than the money I spent on them. I don’t see how anyone is worse off due to my greed.
That sounds like a circular definition. I would posit that the hurting of others, intentionally or unintentionally, is a fundamental component of greed. So, your scenario does not seem to meet that condition.