I think negotiating is an innately dangerous activity that tends to break the societal bonds that keep cultures civil. Taken too far, negotiations tend to devolve into one person taking advantage of another, and who is generally the winner in any negotiation? The one who is willing to take his position the farthest. So there’s an innate tendency to take things too far.
Most big ticket purchases in America are institutionalized theft (cars, homes) with an army of trained and experienced negotiators systematically working over ordinary folks who have little or no experience with negotiated purchases.
Let’s examine how negotiating chips away at one’s moral structure, shall we? Say, you’re a car salesman. Your job is to get the highest price possible for the least value in terms of a car you can manage. What’s more, since most people only buy new cars once a decade now, you aren’t looking for a lot of repeat business. Screwing the customer makes sense here.
Now, as a salesman you are trained not just to sell the car, but to sell the customer. What this means is, you look for flaws and/or weakenesses in your customer’s character or situation and use those to your advantage. For example, if your customer betrays that he has never consulted the Consumer Reports car buying guide but instead reads high-performance auto magazines, you’re going to lead him to a muscle car that will spend half its road life in the shop. If the customer’s wife wants a car that’s a certain color, you’ll see that they get the most broken down old beater you have (restored so it doesn’t LOOK like a beater any more, of course) that is that color.
And you’ll try to get your customer to finance the car through your company’s finance program, which will charge ungodly high rates.
All this works to your advantage and the customer’s disadvantage – it’s a zero sum game, because you aren’t looking for repeat business. It’s not the business model for ALL automobile dealers, but it is for most of them.
And all that I have said about the adversarial nature of car salesmen and their customers goes double for housing, of course, which is much more of a one-time sale.
Car salesmen and real estate agents trained to use these techniques in selling, and their employers look for people who are naturally talented in such transactions, i.e., morally flawed scum, to work for them. With their training and their natural inclinations, they have a huge advantage over the ordinary citizen who’s looking to buy a car or a house, especially the gullible sort who doesn’t read the fine print and would just want to work with the sort of salesman (or President) he’d enjoy sitting down and having a beer with.
Naturally, this kind of dealing creates a lot of bad feelings, and is undoubtedly the chief reason why car salesmen and real estate agents are so universally despised in American culture.
Thus, negotiating, or haggling as it is also called, breaks down community because it separates people into prey and predator, victim and victor and “vae victus” as the Romans liked to say.
Now in most kinds of economic enterprises everyone is trying to maximize their profits and so forth, but there’s no personal element to it. Best Buys, Target, Walmart, etc., all offer a number of different CD players at different prices with different features, and different people buy them according to what they want and can afford. Nobody takes advantage of anybody in a personal way. You don’t feel like you lost or won when you make a purchase, just that you got what you were looking for.
But imagine the corrosive effects of haggling relationships extended to every purchase you make. No one simply sells you a CD player at a fixed price, the fixed price is merely a starting point for an extended round of haggling between buyer and seller. Even going to the grocery store for food purchases becomes a haggling experience.
That’s how things are in the Middle East. They haggle over everything, well, not everything, but a lot of things that we don’t haggle over.
Of course, some of the haggling involves repeat business and well developed relationships between customer and vendor, but even then there are ample opportunities for distrust and misunderstandings.
But what’s more important is the corrosive effect all this haggling has on the culture. The people of the Middle East are literally out to “get” each other every time they buy something. They have a saying “I against my brother, my brother and I against my cousins, my brother, my cousins and I against the world.” Makes perfect sense if you understand that it’s the product of a culture where everyone haggles, all the time."
Haggling turns what should be an unemotional transaction into two people out to rip each other off. Furthermore, in addition to the economic advantages of being able to out-haggle others, ego tends to enter into it, turning the transaction into a “my dick is bigger than your dick” contest.
This will break social structure down too.
Finally what is the best way to negotiate? From a position of strength. In any deal, the guy who needs the deal most is the one who is going to accept the least favorable terms. And the deal was sealed in the Middle East when Achmed told Abdullah, “Man, it’s incredible how much better negotitions go with Mohammed when you have an AK47 and he doesn’t.”
That’s why most Middle Eastern countries are governed by brutal goons who can and will kill any members of their population who won’t accept their deals, i.e., “I make the rules, you follow them.”
There’s even proof of my theory. Because if you replace the brutal thug with someone who won’t kill off whole huge groups of people when they get out of line, by my reasoning you should have a period of near-anarchy and civil war as all the people who were held in control by the former brutal dictator negotiate new deals with one another with their AK47s and RPGs and whatnot. It happened recently. Little place called “Iraq.”
The Middle East isn’t just a region. It’s an object lesson.
Shagnasty has the right of it in negotiating, though he may not agree with every point I have made.