Adam Smith Greed Vs Incentives

991 Words2 Pages

History has shown us that greed is the power that forces us to buy goods, to produce more, sell more and to invest more; But it is the incentive of that greedy decision that helps us decided how, when, and why to make that choice. Both greed and incentives are different but in the same stance both very alike. Adam Smith, a historic moral philosopher has taught us that both greed and incentives are what we rely on in making the choices that help structure what the economy has become today. In the same stance, he has also taught us that they both are the justification for bad choices, along with why the free markets do more harm than good. The question is how is greed being used. Are we using it to eventually …show more content…

Adam Smiths ‘’invisible hand’’ shows us that when greedy individuals go into big cooperative action it helps their incentives grow into the lines that run to help others. The greed that helps these ‘’big people’’ gives them the incentives to seek out the best and most effective methods of production. The cheaper and more effective they can make a product, the cheaper prices of the product at the store is, which in this case benefits both the producer and consumer! Both greed and incentives play a very important role in our economy. They both can benefit everyone and frankly can destroy the same path. It is the meaning behind the greed, the incentives that depends on if it’s just being selfish or …show more content…

Our technology and communications, along with much more has advanced so far since 1776. With every new expansion of advancements of all sorts, people become greedier. In the same stance, people have more incentives this way as well. In 1776 people relied on each other to produce the products they needed, whereas today you could go online and buy whatever you want internationally all over the world without having to depend really on anyone. If we were to look to the stone age and ask if we would still be stuck there if the incentives of profits were not there, we would already know that isn’t true. We know that people work for more reasons than money. This is proven by the fact that antedate of the invention of money. Animals have been shown to work together to complete tasks that can't be completed alone to get food. Cooperation to complete a task is innovative but not profitable. Efficiency is valued by people so innovation to complete tasks faster or better without any difference in the final result does not yield

Open Document