Comments, relating to the topic, are welcome, add a great deal to a blog, but must be in English, with no profanity, hate-filled insults, or links (unless pre-approved) To contact me with questions: rainnnn7@hotmail.com.




Friday, October 26, 2007

The Problem of Greed

How much is enough?

A recent Krugman column in the NY Times addresses the issue of regulation vs deregulation. He makes a good case that the Feds understood the problem of over loaning to those who didn't have the resources for a loan, subprime loans (terms I only learn what they mean under duress), and why the Republican party and Alan Greenspan did nothing to rein it in even when they knew there was a market bubble in housing that would lead to a crash someday not only for those who borrowed but for loaners.

Deregulation is the keystone of Republican thinking. Free markets know best. Regulations are always bad (unless they relate to sex). Leaving aside the issue that our economy is anything but free market, that lobbyists get through all sorts of regulations that improve their own corporate profits over someone else's, why wouldn't free market be best?

In an ideal culture people would look for the highest good in making their choices-- and that would include businesses. No company would want to put out unhealthy products. No land owner would want to destroy land quality, nor would a mill want to put out pollution simply to make more money. All choices would be made considering the long term impact as well as short term gain.

We would have to be brainless, deaf and blind to think we live in such a culture. So much today revolves around making money and not just enough money because there is no such thing as enough for some people. When you have unregulated greed, you cannot have unregulated markets. People will cheat. They will skim. They will sell things they don't own. And on and on.

In a culture of enough, government regulations would not be needed because people themselves would regulate through approval and disapproval of how others act. They would watch out for each other. Of course, in one sense, they do now too... Wealth and those who possess it are nearly worshiped. Pretentiousness is a quality to be admired. Big house, not good enough, must be biggest. I know through experience that not all wealthy people behave that way. It isn't having money alone that makes someone greedy. It's the attitude they have toward acquiring-- there is never enough.

Native Americans in the region where I live had a value system where the potlatch was the measure of a man's power-- where in celebration, he would give away almost everything he had. As soon as priests got out here, it's one of the first practices they stopped. Can't have undirected and unfettered giving. Even today people are encouraged to give toward organizations that will give them tax write-offs. Giving is enhanced by buildings named after the givers.

You can't even count on giving once to protect your name staying with the building. In Tucson there is a small park that used to be named Dennis Weaver. The story goes that Weaver had donated for the park when he was making a film around Tucson. That lasted until the park needed upgrading. Somebody else's name now decorates the gates to the park. That name will stay until the next upgrade unless the family left an endowment to keep his name and the park both in good shape.

Larry David in 'Curb your Enthusiasm' on HBO did one of his shows on this subject of memorial naming (many are not yet dead when it happens). Several of the leading characters had donated to a medical facility and thereby had a wing named after them-- except one donor had his name be anonymous on the wall, but he made sure everybody knew who he was. Anonymous received more credit, lots of attaboys from his friends which gave him credit for generosity and humility all at the same time.

I got sidetracked but basically what I am wondering about is why is there never enough for some? I see it and know it to be so, but I don't understand it. I was raised differently and maybe that's where it all begins-- how we are trained as children. I was raised to believe in different values. The best things in life may not be free but they sure can't be bought with money.

Can a culture, that has become so materialistic, change it? It might have to start with our children as our attitudes probably do for us today even if we are 64 years old. When I was with my daughter and her family last week-end, she was mentioning that they simply weren't getting their kids into all of the activities that are so common for 9 and 6 year olds. No lessons for this or that. Not in the year around sports leagues. Limited big parties where the gifts bury the children.

I told her yes, you are not doing some things, but look at what you are. Your children snowshoe in the winter. They are as comfortable in the wilderness as in a city park. When in the woods, they know for what to watch to not get lost or hurt. They know what the source of meat is (clue: it's not a grocery store). They know the beauty of a desert night, swimming in a wilderness river. They know how to play with sticks, sand, rocks and lizards.

Maybe if more people knew such things, grew up with such things, we could have a free market system because humans would be wise about the market and greed would not be a virtue to them.

You know, it's not having money that is the problem. It's whether there is ever enough; and if there isn't, then what will one do to keep getting more? Does government, as a tool of the people, need to protect itself from unbounded greed? Deregulation only works in a culture that has taught its people true values.

The Hunter's Moon photos were taken last night, when it first rose above the trees (first two) and then in the morning (last two) just before it went below the mountain. Hunter's moons (the first full moon after the Harvest Moon) look cold, sublime in their beauty but taking their photos does require a coat, a good camera, and a tripod. Seeing it was free. Photographing it costs money.

This last photo was gotten by controlling the exposure and darkening the moon to show more clearly its craters. The actual color was white, not yellowish.

The other thing I found interesting, which I admit I had never looked at before, which says I am not into astronomy, is that the moon is different in the morning as the craters shift to the other side. (astronomy buffs please don't groan). I thought it might be that way but had never taken the time to really look. (All images can be enlarged by clicking on them.)

I think this Hunter's Moon drew me into it, made me want to possess it in the only way I could-- through a photo. I guess that is a kind of greed too. :) Hey, I admit it, I do have a greed to possess certain things-- just they are usually the ones money can't buy!

The moon will still be full for a few days. Enjoy it. It's free to look.

8 comments:

Ingineer66 said...

Nice photos. I am always drawn to the full moon and last night was no exception. It looked great.

But of course I have to take exception to the political part of your blog. The mortgage crisis is mostly the fault of the people that bought homes that they knew they could not afford and partially the fault of lenders that were making loans that they knew were bad. The government is not at fault and should not be expected to bail out stupid people. But this being America where everyone expects to be saved from themselves and everything else. I guess the rest of us that did not take bad loans and bought houses we could actually make the payments on and pay taxes and pay our bills will now help pay for the people to continue to live beyond their means.
And how is this the republicans fault. It is no different than the Dot.com bubble in the stock market under Clinton. Why didn't the democrats do something to keep that from happening? Everyone knew the Stock Markets were way over priced and that it would end some day. And all the while all Clinton talked about was how great the stock market and the economy were doing under his watch.
It is no different, it was not Clinton's fault then and it is not the republicans fault now. When times are good everyone wants in on it and when times are not good everyone wants someone to blame.

Rain Trueax said...

My piece is on greed more than one party or the other. Greed is endemic in our society-- both parties. Greenspan was appointed by republicans and democrats. Did you read Krugman's piece? It's worth reading. The reason I mentioned the republicans here is they have had the power the last years through the time that this got so bad. Greenspan has acted like he had nothing he could do about it as he now says the war was something he didn't like. He seemed to sit there doing whatever was popular and now is backtracking.

Greed is not republican or democrat. It's an attitude that can infect anybody.

The people buying those houses ended up being fooled by a system that seemed to always go one way. It isn't just them who lose though when it collapses; so do investors.

The issue though is greed, not parties. They both can be that way

Ingineer66 said...

Thanks for clearing that up. I knew the point of your post, but we have not had a disagreement for a while so I had to make one up. I am off to Colorado for a long weekend, so no postings from me for a few days. And I posted a funny automated presidential candidate picker from ABC/USA Today on my blog.

Anonymous said...

Lovely pic Rain ! By the way pick up a copy of Seneca's " Letters From A Stoic ". There is more good sense in that book which was written by a man who died in 65 A.D.than most of our contemporary ones that people praise ad nauseum. :-)

Anonymous said...

What a great post, Rain and oh, so true. I do believe it's values that's been lost along the way somehow. The word "moderation" doesn't seem to exist in our society at ALL anymore!
Awesome photos and I HAVE been enjoying that moon the past few nights....seeing it on the island with NO light pollution is spectacular. And when I see things like that or in nature, I still have to say...except for your health (which, in this country is a whole other issue)...I do believe the best things in life are free.

Rain Trueax said...

The issue with greed, which was the main point of my blog, is that Republicans favor deregulation and that often leads to debacles because of the greed of people-- from any party. Democrats tend to favor economic regulations but not so much moral ones and it's vice versa for Republicans which is why I mentioned the issue. The idea that deregulation is always good ignores the nature of mankind in general.

Diane Widler Wenzel said...

Wonderful observation on the moon's craters apperaing to shift in relation to evening and morning. I think the moon is greatly spherical in your photos.

Mary Lou said...

Blame the media! When I was growing up the standard size house was 1000 sf and under. and our families were larger. We shared bedrooms, and we ate in the kitchen, and shared one bathroom. OH, and we saved and waited until we were able to buy that tiny little home.

Now couples get married and want a home right now! a BIG home. one with at least 3 bedrooms and a family room, and a bath for each room.

I bought my first home, (this one) in 1992, knowing it was all I could afford, and that I could afford it when I retired. But now, the housing prices have skyrocketed here, the average size home is 4000SF which dwarfs my 1400 sf home. this increases taxes and insurance and my ARM has gone up too. SO now all these defaulting loans have affected my life, and all because of GREED. You gotta have it, Keep up with the Joneses, buy it now! yadayada.
youre right. It is greed. We are going to have to pay the piper really soon.
(OK< Im off my soapbox now!;) )