The article in the url below presents an admirable defense of ‘greed.’ The author argues that ‘greed’ is a relative term that is easy to identify in excess, but much harder at points in-between:
“Over the last three decades, the average compensation for chief executives of major American corporations has gone from 35 times the average pay of American workers to 275 times. That increase, it is suggested, or at least implied, constitutes greed. But what if the increase had ''only'' been to 100 times? Would that have signaled greed? What about 50 times? And why wasn't 35 times itself a sign of greed?”
The focus of the article is the argument that by applying the label ‘greed’ to actions that are really only self-interest (i.e., by equating the two), we are ignoring the economic benefits that self-interest and the pursuit of profit bring, while diminishing the power of the accusation of ‘greed’:
“Economics has given us a lot of better words, from self-interest to incentive to profit. They do not mean the same thing as greed, but they have displaced it, obscured it -- and certainly demoted it from being a deadly sin.”
Have a good weekend.
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
Modern Market Thinking Has Devalued a Deadly Sin
By PETER STEINFELS
969 words
27 September 2008
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
19
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/us/27beliefs.html
