Self-Interest vs Selfishness

[rewcox]

I want to be happy, and so do all of you.

I know a network marketing business. $50 in, $100-200 month. If 5 of you will join with me, in a short time you will be receiving recurring revenue, which will give you more time to enjoy life.

What else can deliver such a lifestyle with a meager investment?

A person who is intelligent and prudent can have self interest while including others needs and. make them a part of our self interest. If you desire something just for yourself that is called selfish, but if running a business and making decisions for the well being and prosperity of employees, that being the motivation, you are not being selfish, even though you will benefit financially far greater than the employees. The challenge then becomes keeping employees satisfied with the mere pitance they receive in comparison.

If the owners are nice it should be ok. Greedy capitalism is selfish in nature.

[Separatist]

If the owners are nice it should be ok. Greedy capitalism is selfish in nature.

What about greedy un-capitalism?

It's funny, even the greediest capitalist can't be successful without providing a service for someone else and usually for the masses. This is not to say that the individual himself is virtuous, he may indeed be a personal Scrooge, but a business model in meeting needs and providing services to others certainly isn't bad.

Is working to gain a profit, er, surplus bad? If it is, we couldn't give that surplus to the poor. Jesus didn't condemn the surplus, but recommended what to do with it.

[gclayjr]

rewcox,

True, Capitalism is amoral. It is neither good, nor evil. However, it is the best opportunity for self-interest to benefit both the individual and society. Since in a free exchange of goods and services the TRUE self-interest benefits everybody.

However, what most identify as "Greedy Capitalism" is not really capitalism. This is because the "Greedy capitalist" manipulates the system this may be in the form of combining with others to "fix prices or wages", or more likely today to get involved in "Crony Capitalism" where government regulations are used benefit one person/business over others.

The sad thing is that the best way for the "Greedy Capitalist" to gain advantage is to persuade or bribe government officials to promote laws and regulations to make things more "fair", which deviously actually benefits the "greedy capitalist"

True capitalism is NOT a team of government and business. True capitalism is only possible if the4 government does NOT use its power to push things one way or another... even in the name of fairness.

Regards,

George Clay

[2ndRateMind]

2ndRateMind,

you said

Incidentally, Jesus seemed not to have much time for self-interest:

I submit he dedicated his life to his own interest which was to show all of his brothers and sisters how to be saved.

Is it not true that a person who loves his neighbor, and dedicates his life to the service of others ends up happier than someone who has spent his life and energy pursuing pleasure?

what better self interest is there than to pursue such happiness?

Regards,

George Clay

Dear George,

Now you are stretching the meaning of the term 'self-interest' to include every possible form of charitable behaviour. There is a difference between the pursuit of self-interest, and the display of altruism, and we need to be aware of the boundaries. One is concerned with the well-being of oneself, the other, with the well-being of others, however much, or little, happiness may, or may not, be the final long-term end of either road.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Separatist]

True capitalism is simply freedom in the economic sphere. Capital is just tools.

Do you not want to be free to engage in production as you see fit with whatever tools you may need?

Now I know, I know, freedom allows people to be both greedy and virtuous. But the alternative is being dictated to by someone else. The Industrial Revolution was actually a revolution of the common man against state control, privilege etc.

[Separatist]

You can't help others if you don't first take care of yourself. "Love your neighbor as yourself"

[gclayjr]

2ndRateMind,

One is concerned with the well-being of oneself, the other, with the well-being of others, however much, or little, happiness may, or may not, be the final long-term end of either road.

I guess because you assert it, it must be true! If your ideas fail, make it up as you go. By what basis, other than your assertion, do you support the idea that self-interest is not related to pursuing that which in the long run makes you the happiest and is most beneficial?

I submit that was NOT in Lucifer's self interest when he rebelled, and it was in Jesus' self-interest to promote and pursue Heavenly Father's plan which is also in our self-interest.

Regards,
George Clay

[2ndRateMind]

George, dear sparring partner!

Ask yourself this: is there any kind of charity, any show of altruism, which would not, under your definition, qualify as self-interest? If so, what is it? If not, have we not debased the language, so that self-interest, charity, and altruism are now all synonym terminology? Orwellian newspeak, or what?

Best wishes, 2RM.

[2ndRateMind]

You can't help others if you don't first take care of yourself. "Love your neighbor as yourself"

That is, of course, true. Nevertheless, I think Jesus took 'as yourself' for granted, and placed the emphasis on 'love your neighbour'. That is why he took the time to explain who our neighbour is (everyone!) by telling the parable of the good Samaritan. That is my interpretation of the Gospels, anyway. My problem is with people who take care of themselves first, and then forget to help others, and, judging by the state of the world, I would say this is a common phenomenon, even among alleged Christians.

Cheers, 2RM

[2ndRateMind]

The Industrial Revolution was actually a revolution of the common man against state control, privilege etc.

This is actually such a travesty of the truth it needs challenging. The industrial revolution was neither more nor less than the application of machinery to manufacturing and agricultural processes. It was marked by the depopulation of the countryside, where the common man had previously been employed and was no longer required because of that machinery, and the rapid growth of the cities, where the common man was now needed in the mills, warehouses and factories. How was this accomplished? By the class elites enclosing common land for their private use and evicting the common man from properties where he had previously made a reasonable living, and thus sending him inevitably to urban slums and brutally arduous labour.

EP Thompson is good on this, in The Making of the English Working Class.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Separatist]

Thanks. I'm mostly persuaded by the following...

https://mises.org/library/popular-inter ... revolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://mises.org/library/redeeming-ind ... revolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://mises.org/library/individualism ... revolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://fee.org/freeman/a-myth-shattered ... evolution/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://mises.org/library/capitalism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Histor ... 0226320723" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...and the clear evidence that Malthus and Malthusians since have been dead wrong. Peoples lives have been improving ever since - life expectancy/infant mortality etc. We like to romanticize pre-industrial life, but it was pretty much the shits - literally.

A few nuggets from John Mackey's Conscious Capitalism

-200 yrs ago, 85% of the world's population lived in extreme poverty (defined as less than $1 a day); that number is now only about 16%.

-Average income per capita has increased 1000% since 1800. It has increased 1600% in developed countries, 3500% in Japan since 1700.

-Adjusting for affordability and quality improvements, the standard of living of ordinary Americans has increased 10,000% since 1800.

-The world's population reached 1 billion in 1804. It has grown to seven billion since.

-In the past two hundred years, life expectancy has increased to 68 yrs, from it's long historical average of around thirty years or less.

-Literacy rates have jumped up to 84 percent of adults, from near complete illiteracy almost two hundred years ago.

-Slavery is all but non-existent.

People can come to their own conclusions.

[2ndRateMind]

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking in academic terms, whereby the industrial revolution is generally considered to have occurred between about 1760 and about 1840. I do not argue that life is not better now than then, only that, for the common man, that period was unadulterated disaster.

Nevertheless, I shall enjoy reading your references.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[gclayjr]

2ndClassMind,

you said...

is there any kind of charity, any show of altruism, which would not, under your definition, qualify as self-interest? If so, what is it? If not, have we not debased the language, so that self-interest, charity, and altruism are now all synonym terminology? Orwellian newspeak, or what?

This is a ridiculous statement, because the existence or non existence of such a charity does not mean that somehow society has fallen into newspeak. It would be possible that donating to any charity is in my best Self-interest.

However, Many such Charities DO exist. I will name 2;

1) The Clinton Foundation
2) Planned Parenthood

So, since I have risen to your challenge, will you back off from YOUR newspeak????

Regards,

George Clay

[gclayjr]

2ndClassMind,

Despite your effort to help someone sell a book, this statement is patently false

The industrial revolution was neither more nor less than the application of machinery to manufacturing and agricultural processes.

The answers to 2 questions proves that.

2) What was the structure of (European) society BEFORE the Industrial revolution?

Ans: It was Monarchical with all power in the hands of royalty

2) What was the structure of (European) society AFTER the industrial revolution?

Ans: A new social group called the Bourgeoisie arose as a result of the their successful applications of skills and machinery

Now had you waxed eloquent about a subject often favored by Marxist thinkers, on the fact that society was BETTER off under a feudal system, and that the rise of the Bourgeoisie was an evil thing... well you would still be wrong, but you would at least be following thought of your fellow Marxists, that can be twisted from the facts. The idea that NOTHING occurred except mechanization and people moving to cities is just not supported by the facts.

REgards,

George Clay

[2ndRateMind]

2ndClassMind,

you said...

is there any kind of charity, any show of altruism, which would not, under your definition, qualify as self-interest? If so, what is it? If not, have we not debased the language, so that self-interest, charity, and altruism are now all synonym terminology? Orwellian newspeak, or what?

This is a ridiculous statement, because the existence or non existence of such a charity does not mean that somehow society has fallen into newspeak. It would be possible that donating to any charity is in my best Self-interest.

However, Many such Charities DO exist. I will name 2;

1) The Clinton Foundation
2) Planned Parenthood

So, since I have risen to your challenge, will you back off from YOUR newspeak????

Regards,

George Clay

So, donating to a charity you have political issues with is not self-interest? Whereas, donating to charities you do agree with is self-interest? Because, presumably, people will be happier in the end if they donate to charities George likes, than if they donated to charities George doesn't like?

Hmmm. This is making my head spin, it is so contrived. I sense a flaw in the position, but I'm blowed if I can put my finger on it...

Do you really want to argue that all your charity is just self-interest, and all the charity of dissidents from 'reality according to George' is altruism?

Best wishes, 2RM.

[2ndRateMind]

2ndClassMind,

Despite your effort to help someone sell a book, this statement is patently false

The industrial revolution was neither more nor less than the application of machinery to manufacturing and agricultural processes.

The answers to 2 questions proves that.

2) What was the structure of (European) society BEFORE the Industrial revolution?

Ans: It was Monarchical with all power in the hands of royalty

2) What was the structure of (European) society AFTER the industrial revolution?

Ans: A new social group called the Bourgeoisie arose as a result of the their successful applications of skills and machinery

Now had you waxed eloquent about a subject often favored by Marxist thinkers, on the fact that society was BETTER off under a feudal system, and that the rise of the Bourgeoisie was an evil thing... well you would still be wrong, but you would at least be following thought of your fellow Marxists, that can be twisted from the facts. The idea that NOTHING occurred except mechanization and people moving to cities is just not supported by the facts.

REgards,

George Clay

My dear George,

Be assured, I am no Marxist. In fact, I am something of a floating voter, inclined to lend my vote to wherever I think it will do most good for humanity. And I am all for wealth. Indeed, I want everyone wealthy, insofar as that is consistent with the ecological carrying capacity of spaceship Earth. While a bourgeois degree of wealthiness for all remains impossible, I want, at least, no one absolutely poor*. Hope this clarifies for you.

Best wishes, 2RM.

*living on $1.50 per day or less.

[gclayjr]

2ndRateMind,

So, donating to a charity you have political issues with is not self-interest? Whereas, donating to charities you do agree with is self-interest? Because, presumably, people will be happier in the end if they donate to charities George likes, than if they donated to charities George doesn't like?

Hmmm. This is making my head spin, it is so contrived. I sense a flaw in the position, but I'm blowed if I can put my finger on it...

Do you really want to argue that all your charity is just self-interest, and all the charity of dissidents from 'reality according to George' is altruism?

DO I feel that I am better off personally for the charities I have contributed to??? You Bet !!!!

For example, I believe that one reason that I was able to dodge several layoffs so that I was able to retire, while not in wealth, but with enough, is because God kept his promise to have my back if I paid my tithing, even when there was no obvious benefit for me.

I feel that I am better off believing in the joy brought to others by contributing to a charity that delivers bibles to people living in totalitarian countries.

I feel much more pleasure in taking some of my limited resources and helping one of my sons repair his kitchen so that his house can be livable, than I can think of with any bauble I could buy with that money.

I get great enjoyment going over to another of my sons homes each day and meeting his kids as they get off the bus, then helping them with their homework so as to take some of the pressure off from him and his working wife,

I DO think that all of that is more in my self-interest than pursuing Babylon's pleasures wherever I can find them.

Maybe your inability to recognize the self interest and joy in such activities is why your head spins with incomprehension.

Regards,

George Clay

[skmo]

Selfishness has no regard for others, Self-Interest is more related to doing the right things for yourself, which can be done while respecting the needs and rights of others.

I believe this says it all, I cannot really see anything describing it better.

[Thinker]

There is some degree of self-interest in all we do - otherwise we wouldn't do it.
I think it was Scott Peck who explained this in terms of "smart selfishness" being win-win for us and others... and "stupid selfishness" as disregarding others affected.

[2ndRateMind]

George, I am truly glad that your charitable acts have brought you contentedness. You deserve that.

Best wishes, 2RM