For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Altruism through selfish self-interest
Written By : TrogloPundit

Last week, I wrote: “Corporations already do share wealth” Which is true, but not precisely true, as a few commenters pointed out.

It’s the word “share” that causes the problem.

It’s true that corporations “share” wealth. But not in the same way that children – we hope – “share” toys. Not the way you “share” a sandwich. This corporate “sharing” isn’t a zero-sum activity. It’s not “either you get it or I get it.” This “sharing” is more: I have to give to you so that I can get more in the future.

Here’s something I wrote back in 2004:

I’ve sometimes marveled at the level of cooperation that exists in our society.

I remember the first time this occurred to me: it was at a four-way stop sign. I pulled up, waited for the van ahead of me to go, then took my place at the intersection, waited again for two vehicles on the cross street, and the oncoming car turning left in front of me. Then, the others all waited for me, as I drove through.

Man, I thought. That’s cooperation. That’s teamwork, and it’s happening every day, a dozen times per person, all across the country. We cooperate with people we’ve never seen before, and will never see again.

Sure, there is the occasional jerk who cuts you off, or who won’t let you merge, or who drives drunk. But the vast majority of the time, we’re taking care of each other out there.

Then I realized: sure, we’re cooperating, but not out of altruism. No, we’re cooperating because of good old-fashioned self-interest.

I could have simply rolled through the stop sign, if I’d chosen to. And what would have happened? Probably nothing: the other cars were hardly moving, and would have stopped in plenty of time to give me the one-finger salute.

Or, maybe not. Fender bender, and my fault – hello thousand-dollar repair bill and higher insurance premiums. Or, maybe a cop sees me. Ticket, couple hundred bucks, which I then have to go home and explain to my wife.

Rather than an example of community-minded teamwork, our traffic system turns out to be a perfect example of simple, individual self-interest, which makes a vast, complex, interconnected environment work.

There are lots of similar examples in the world. Do bees know they’re helping make flowers? No, they’re just trying to store up some food. Self interest.

The owner of a snack food manufacturing company decides to open a second location. Is he thinking about that decision’s effect on the broader economy? The new jobs, increased demand for labor and for raw materials, new business for his suppliers, and more work for the trucking companies?

Or is he just trying to line his own pockets?

I’ll bet on the latter. Still, by his actions, selfishly motivated as they may be, he has a positive effect on the economy and on other people.

Corporations exist to make money. To profit. If they can’t profit financially, they won’t exist. In this way, they are cousins to the rest of us individuals. You, me, the barefooted guy selling oranges in Delhi.

Do you work for free? No. Unless you have a trust fund or sugar daddy, you can’t. I can’t. I have to make money. I have to profit. So I develop and sell my skills; my experience; my abilities. So do you.

So do corporations. We sell our labor to them, and they sell their products to us. Neither side has the other’s well-being in mind; and yet, both sides provide the other with exactly what they need. Both sides need the other side to have what they need, so that they themselves can have what they need.

It’s not breaking-a-cookie-in-half sharing. It’s not human-ladder cooperation. It’s everybody-wins self-interest.

Where would we be without it?

0
  • Joebritton

    The bullshit never ends, does it?

    A chief executive officer of a Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 index company was paid, on average, $9.25 million in total compensation in 2009.[1] At the same time, millions of workers lost their jobs, their homes and their retirement savings in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

    Executive pay has taken center stage since the $700 billion government bailout of financial institutions. Americans expressed outrage as big banks helped create the financial crisis, took billions in taxpayer bailouts, paid out billions in pay and bonuses and are now lobbying on financial regulatory reform.

    The case studies here focus on executive pay at six of the biggest banks that received government bailout funds and their multimillion-dollar lobbying efforts. Also in Executive PayWatch, you can find CEO compensation data for some of the country’s largest companies; learn how you, as a shareholder, can have your “Say-on-Pay”; and find out what you can do to ensure re-regulation of the financial system.

    >/blockquote>

    Your thesis would be better served by silence, lest someone look up the data on what profit really means.

    • Anonymous

      Funny thing about that: the greatest income inequality in the world exists in communist nations.

      • Hangs left

        We’re getting to that degree of disparity in the US. Today the disparity is greater than any time since 1929.

        The question is, what will it take for you to realize the disparity here is already too severe?

        • Anonymous

          Then what would you set the limit as? You lefties always talk about “disparity” and the “gap”, but you never actually define what should the limit be. Your terms are just nebulous and have no substance.

          • Joebritton

            Top no more than 10 times the bottom. Or a minimum working wage of 20 per hour compared with a maximum of 200 per hour (taking the 10/1 ratio further). That’s almost 3 million a year for the top guy.

            Figure that out. Can any CEO who makes 200 an hour actually gripe that he is being underpaid? Some would like the ratio smaller, and I would fully go along with that, say 5/1. What we really have today is exploitation of the system and the top executive running away with hundreds of millions.

          • Joebritton

            PS: There’s also support here for a top tax rate of 70%, taking it all the way back to Kennedy.

          • Anonymous

            Can any CEO who makes 200 an hour actually gripe that he is being underpaid?

            Yes, he can.

            I know you don’t like these pesky facts, but the fact is there is no maximum amount of wealth or income. You do not have the right to say anyone has made “too much money”. They can make as much money as they can convince their employers to pay them.

          • Anonymous

            And how do you justify limiting the pay of CEOs? Shouldn’t that be up to the stockholders and the Board of Directors, you know, people who actually own and run the company? Why should anyone else get a say?

          • Anonymous

            Furthermore, you are setting an arbitrary limit on pay and telling a CEO what he should be comfortable with. How do you determine this arbitrary limit? Who decides it? You’re basically advocating that the decision be taken out of the managers of the company and put into the hands of bureaucrats who neither know nor care how the actual business is run or how to get the best talent to maximize profits for their investors.

          • Anonymous

            Furthermore, you are setting an arbitrary limit on pay and telling a CEO what he should be comfortable with. How do you determine this arbitrary limit? Who decides it? You’re basically advocating that the decision be taken out of the managers of the company and put into the hands of bureaucrats who neither know nor care how the actual business is run or how to get the best talent to maximize profits for their investors.

          • Anonymous

            Top what? 10%, 20%? And bottom what?

            Because the folks on the very bottom earn nothing. 10 x 0 = . . . .0

        • Anonymous

          We’re getting to that degree of disparity in the US. Today the disparity is greater than any time since 1929.

          The question is, what will it take for you to realize the disparity here is already too severe?

          No, the question is what will it take for liberals to prove their ridiculous claims about income disparity.

          First, prove that American incomes are as unequal as you claim.

          Second, prove that the inequality is in some way a threat to the American way of life.

          Third, prove that whatever solution you no doubt have in mind would do a damn thing to solve this alleged problem.

          • Anonymous

            It never ends with these Marxists. They always talk about limiting CEO pay, but decide on some non-empirical arbitrary limit.

          • Anonymous

            It never ends with these Marxists. They always talk about limiting CEO pay, but decide on some non-empirical arbitrary limit.

        • Anonymous

          We’re getting to that degree of disparity in the US. Today the disparity is greater than any time since 1929.

          The question is, what will it take for you to realize the disparity here is already too severe?

          No, the question is what will it take for liberals to prove their ridiculous claims about income disparity.

          First, prove that American incomes are as unequal as you claim.

          Second, prove that the inequality is in some way a threat to the American way of life.

          Third, prove that whatever solution you no doubt have in mind would do a damn thing to solve this alleged problem.

        • Anonymous

          Bwahahahaaha, no we aren’t.

          Castro is worth hundreds of billions while his population lives in poverty.

          We could never get to that point without using government to confiscate wealth on a mass scale. Like in a communist regime.

    • Anonymous

      The bullshit never ends, does it?

      No, your bullshit never does seem to end.

      • Anonymous

        The thing is, it COULD end if this were a well run site….which it is not.

        TR

    • http://troglopundit.wordpress.com TrogloPundit

      You work for free, Joe?

      • Anonymous

        If so he is likely overpaid.

    • http://troglopundit.wordpress.com TrogloPundit

      You work for free, Joe?

  • Joebritton

    If selfishness, by which I believe you mean greed, isn’t controlled, it would propell us back into the 19th century and Dicken’s England. Surely, if those people including young children didn’t have the few coins tey made working seven days a week for 12 hour day, how would they have eaten at all? So they only lived to age 35 on average, if they did not have this work, how long would they have survived.

    As well put in that movie, greed is good. It helps the serfs to exist longer. Without greed there would be no economic system at all, no work.

    In the middle 19th century, while thousands of people in Ireland were starving during the potato famine, entrepreneurs were sending food out of Ireland because it was more profitable to do so. They couldn’t exist if they didn’t do so, profit you know. But for the sake of this greed, hundreds of thousands of Irish people starved to death. So watch what you say when you praise greed or the business is business ethic.

    • Joebritton

      Greed is what created people like Marx, who couldn’t stand what the rich were doing to the poor.

      • Anonymous

        And created a whole new way for the rich to exploit the poor.

      • Anonymous

        So greed needs to be controlled then, as you said.

        The government should insist that you get rich only via hard work, creativity, luck, or some combination thereof.

        You may not get rich the way Castro, Stalin, Lenin, the Kim Ils, Mao, etc got rich: from the barrel of a gun.

        I’m glad you agree that the proper role of society is largely to keep leftists out of other peoples pockets.

      • Anonymous

        Greed is what created people like Marx

        I agree, greed is what created people like Marx. You’d have to be a greedy bastard to think that you have the right to pick the pocket of anyone with “too much” wealth.

    • http://www.wordaroundthenet.com Christopher Taylor

      Some day I’d love to read a post from you that was actually about the blog entry you attach it to.

    • Anonymous

      The conditions you are talking about were made possible via government collusion with big business interests and a legally enshrined class system.

    • Anonymous

      The conditions you are talking about were made possible via government collusion with big business interests and a legally enshrined class system.

    • Anonymous

      In the middle 19th century, while thousands of people in Ireland were starving during the potato famine, entrepreneurs were sending food out of Ireland because it was more profitable to do so.

      Yep, isn’t it terrible when land and power is handed out by big government to those with good connections? It just goes to show you the consequences of government control – as do the famines in the USSR, the famines in China, the famines in North Korea, the famines in Sudan…just to name a few examples.

      Show me a single famine that occurred in a free-market capitalist country, and then we’ll talk.

  • Murry

    Actually your analysis is not quite right. There are several different types of people on the intersection. In somer cars there are people who you here like to call “liberas” They let a few people pass because they believe it is only fair that they let some other cars pass before they drive. In some other cars there are conservativs. They come to the intersection, see that cars are letting other cars pass think for a moment why this might be happening and can’t really believe why this is working. Then they think for a moment and come up with a crude logic about how somehow self interest and selfishness must be involved in this. Some of them let some others pass because they fear the system will break down. Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly drive right through because they care neither about other people nor the system but are on their way to Roger Ailes office and are afraid to be late to negotiate a new contract.

    • Anonymous

      Not that this post really deserves a response, considering that our brilliant political philosopher here can spell neither “liberal” nor “conservative,” but I really am curious about a few things.

      I see two half-formed attempts at explanations for motive power in your post.
      1. “Fairness”
      2. The fear that the “system” will “break down.”

      Considering the first motivation: if “fairness” is truly your only motivation for stopping and letting other cars pass, then does this mean that you simply blow through four-way stops when no one is there?
      What about a case when other cars have been flying through and haven’t given you a chance to go through: do you decide suddenly that this is not fair, and attempt to cross, damn the consequences? After all, it’s only fair that it should be your turn, and why should you care if you get hit, since you care nothing about your own self-interest.

      As far as “preserving the system” goes, this isn’t truly a motivation because it precludes the valuation of the “system”; here, traffic laws. And why, brilliant philosopher, would one value this “system” and fear its destruction? The obvious answer is because it protects oneself and those one cares about. We return to simple self-interest.

      It’s a philosophy which values fairness and fairness alone that truly scares me. Given a situation where there are 99 jobs for 100 unemployed people, this philosophy demands that nobody get a job, due to it not being “fair.”

      Liberal policies: they may render everyone penniless, broken and dead, but at least then everyone is equal.

  • Dingoman

    I know it is hard for the average conservative sociopath to imagine: even if the guy in the car next to you is doing the same thing as you are doing – it is not necessarily for the same reason. There might be one guy who let’s pass ten other cars because he is not in a hurry and it makes him feel good to make other people a little happy (I know that is hard to believe for the average conservative sociopath, but really not that uncommon). There might be one who let’s pass just one car before he forces himself into the intersection because that what he considers as fair. There might be one who is too afraid to drive and let’s twenty cars pass before he dares to enter the intersection. And of course there is the conservative sociopath who believes that all people are as self centered and selfish as himself and makes up weired theories to explain this unbelievable miracle of cooperation he has just witnessed.

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info