Exploring the Bittersweet Nature of Greed

Greed. Think of it as a ying-yang, there are two completely different sides to it, but yet they are so similar. Greed is bittersweet. When pandora lift open the box, she let out this character trait. This character trait, “Greed” was identified as “bad”, that is not all to it though. There is always two sides to something, two sides to every story, two sides to every situation, there is a victim, and there is the perpetrator. As humans, the goal is to strive for success, nothing can stop that. As humans, we are born into a greedy society, where everybody wants the best for themselves, nothing can change that. There are limits to greed, limits that if crossed can go from good greed to bad greed. The person that determines the type of greed

With unregulated capitalism wages of workers would get reduced. Meaning that people (mostly the disadvantaged) that worked for monopolist would get their salary cut short. Robber Barons developed. Robber Barons being a person who “gives”, but also profits from it. Prices would rise, the reason for this was because there was no competition amongst companies. Lastly, monopolist would corrupt the government. With the monopolist having so much capital, they manipulated the government and those around them. Although the opposing position, “Greed is not good” stated valid points that position is not the strongest argument. With workers getting their wages cut the extra money would go to help the public. It was a bittersweet act. Furthermore, because of greed America is the powerhouse it is today and has been since the Gilded Age. A person can say greed is not good, but nothing will change, humans have a characteristic of greed, that’s how we aim for success. A nation with a high economy is strong and worthy, and that is because of

Philanthropist Andrew Carnegie, explained in the article Wealth that, “There was, for the most part social equality and even political equality because for those engaged in industrial pursuits typically had little or no political involvement.” Also in the same article it states, “The problem of our age is the proper administration of wealth, so that the ties of brotherhood may still bind together the rich and poor in harmonious relationship.” With political equality, came control, peacefulness. The people of that time had adapted to the workings of that time era, where the majority relied on the minority, and the capitalism cycle. The community had gotten used to it, with this it created a harmonious relationship amongst the two. Like Carnegie said himself in the text evidence. Do not think of it as someone worked for someone, in this case the minority and majority worked together to create a effective and successful working cycle that brought in capital. Since both parties were getting pleased with this there was go chaos, no riots with the people. Usually when there are riots/strikes work gets stopped or suspended for that particular day in order to proceed with the strike. Carnegie believed that as the minority having such great amounts of money, they should consider giving their surplus to the community, they would be then considered philanthropist. Most of them did so, this