Greed Is Goob

Today I find myself a little miffed. A little frustrated. As well I might be. For I have come to the conclusion that this society, this world we live in, for all of its promise, for all of its innovation and high technologies, is actually more perception than substance. That it's actually more disappointment and irritation, than solace and satisfaction. I'm talking about the incessant daily frustrations that seem to come with the products and services we buy, based on very clever advertising and expectations, only to find them falling short of what was actually promised.  And wondering why.

In their infancy on the drawing board and in the planning stages, there are many wonderful processes, products, and services which promise to offer us all manner of conveniences, leisures, and efficiencies. Unfortunately they often fail in those promises either shortly after coming to fruition or sometime thereafter. And the culprit seems to lay not within the technologies or innovations themselves, but within the actual follow-through once it moves beyond development and into production. The fact that it may be either a product or a service doesn't seem to make much difference.  The fact that all are subject to the pressures of profit does. 

It is, unfortunately, one of the pervasive consequences of living in a capitalist society. And an irony which undermines one of the supposed benefits of the same capitalist system. The pursuit of profit which drives innovation. A supposed benefit that looks pretty good on paper. But it is the pressure of that pursuit, the pressure to profit, which will nearly always lead to a product's undoing (and sometimes a company's) as sales begin to reach saturation and a business can only continue to increase its annual profits by either raising prices, reinventing the product (new and improved) to make the older version obsolete so that you must buy it again, or by cutting back in the areas of quality, quantity, or even altering production levels (such as demanding more from workers who are paid less to do more and who cannot maintain attention to detail, or are simply unable to maintain quality at ever-higher production rates).

This is not to say that enormous profits are not made, all the same. Indeed they are. But it lays bare the biggest failure of capitalism, and its most familiar one. And the fly in the ointment is our old friend ...... GREED.

I seem to recall a time not so long ago, though again it may be only perception, when business in America was quite different. Of course, there have always been those with a voracious appetite for wealth and power. The "robber barons", for example. But one was still able to find, surviving in their midst, the honest and sincere business owners and entrepreneurs. People who took pride in their businesses, in their products, and in their ideas. And although they still hoped to become profitable and to attain an elevated comfort level for themselves and their families, it was not the sole, obsessive motivation which drove them. So too, their accepted methods for increasing profits were far different than what is the accepted norm of today.

Again, I do not pretend that there existed some "golden age" in which all business owners were imbued with higher ideals and moral purpose than those in business today. (One has only to read of the shoddy clothing and equipment furnished to the Union armies during the Civil War, with the suppliers making a killing.) Greed unarguably plays a leading role at every point in the history of our world. But as compared with what seems to be a dearth of ethical and committed businesses today, there really seems to be a time when a business was considered a reflection of its owner, and a time when that mattered.

Perhaps, as much as any other factor, it's simply become a crisis of scale, with national chains replacing locally owned businesses. So that we lose the opportunity to meet and get to know our business owners. While these faceless businesses hawk ever more wares that come not only from beyond our communities, but beyond our shores, as well.

By comparison, I remember a time when companies and businesses were owned and operated by the original innovators, inventors, and entrepreneurs. And to these owners, who most often were known locally, it mattered a great deal what kind of product they were sending out their doors. For many, it was more important than profit. For they believed that the way to more profits was to make a better product. A quite archaic way of thinking in today's business world.

These owners often ran their companies for their entire lives. They knew intimately many of the people that worked for them and actually cared to provide their workers with a decent wage, benefits, and eventually health insurance ..... because that's what you did for people in your community. Even Henry Ford knew that if you didn't pay people a decent wage, they couldn't buy your cars. As much as the products going out the doors, so too did the people going out those doors reflect upon the business owners when you all lived in the same communities. Even though, for the owners, it may have been a loftier neighborhood, how you were thought of in your community was still important.

Admittedly, this was not the overwhelming majority of business owners which cared so much for their companies and their employees. But there were many existing that did, and it was certainly not the rarity it appears to be now. Again, this was before so many large corporate conglomerates and multinationals became what is now the overwhelming landscape we see along main street and beyond. And there is a correlation to be found there.

One of the differences between "then" and "now" seems to be in the motivations for starting a business. It is true that in each of these business climates there have been innovators and inventors who have given birth to companies and inserted their hearts and souls. Yet, in an earlier time, the owner was the company, and vice versa. And it was rare that he would entertain the thought of selling his company, his "child". It was unthinkable. Nor would he consider cutting every corner in order to increase already liveable, if not sizeable, profits. Compare that with now, where it is considered normal and customary to do so. And, unfortunately, where it must be so in order to survive the pressures of simply staying afloat. If everyone else is doing it, how else can you compete?

Again, we do not assume there existed a time when ethics and reputation and doing what was right took precedence over all other business considerations. To do so would be simply naive. But perhaps the difference is in a business atmosphere which allows such a thing to occur. In today's climate it becomes nearly impossible. And this is where we can draw a relation between simple greed and today's motivations for starting a business.

Greed, as a driver of today's business, is merely profit motive on steroids. It is aggressive, meant to build in a short amount of time ....... and destructive. And it leads others to follow along the same destructive path simply in order to compete, in order to reach the "big leagues". And make no mistake about it. Greed is destructive. Though Gordon Gekko, the legendary character from the film Wall Street, may have proclaimed, "Greed is good", it is only good for a very small number of individuals. And when the collateral damage of those exclusive benefits far outweigh the collective benefits to a society, it must be considered destructive and, in military thinking, a failed objective. 

Looking back again to businesses "then", it seemed that many business owners entered into a business as a livelihood venture. Something which, with loving care and attention, would last them to the grave, and for their offspring, possibly beyond. That, in itself, was their prime motivation. But today it seems to be quite a different motivator.

It would be incorrect, however, to simply say it is "greed" which has changed our current world for the worse. Greed has always existed, so long as there has been "wealth" or the idea of some having more than others. After all, the antithesis of greed would never leave one in a position of having more than others, now would it? But perhaps the difference has become one in which instant gratification has now taken a prominent hold on the reins.

For many it is the idea of getting rich which causes them to enter into business at all. And rather than trying to build a business over a generation or two, more often they are looking to cash out at the earliest opportunity. Maybe that's just an extension of the, "I want it all and I want it now" mentality that has taken such a firm foothold in our society. But when more businesses maintain an "all ahead full" mentality, you are either forced to follow closely in the same path, or get lost in the wake. Both equally dangerous options when one is following a drunken captain who gives no consideration to anything more than moving ahead at all speed.

It must be said that the pursuit of profits, of itself, is not such a bad thing. Obviously, it is the engine which drives economies in a capitalist system. But when it becomes the sole consideration within that system, then it threatens to undermine all of the other benefits within a society, and even democracy itself. And let's not forget that the whole reason we form collective societies and nations is because it is in the best interests of all to do so. When we reach a point where that is no longer true, then what's the point? And when we are left with a "Pottersville", where wealth accumulates towards the few, while the quality of life for the many suffers, then the laws and rules (moral or otherwise) which bind that society will inevitably begin to break down. The contract is considered no longer legitimate and it becomes a free-for-all. You take ..... or you don't get.


The problem today can be squarely laid at the feet of "big business".  It is a characteristic symptom of size.  A symptom of huge corporate conglomerates and multinationals whose only loyalties are to profits and stock options, rather than people and communities, or even nations.  And it has led us to a market that is anything but free,  and where the rules of the game are dictated by those who have the sizable weight to throw around.  Is it fair to blame "big business"? I think it is. And the reasons for doing so are easily found.

 First, if nothing else can be offered, business can always be counted on to be consistent. This means that with very narrowly defined goals come very narrowly defined ways of reaching them. It also leads to a tendency towards a "pretzel logic", where the same solution to every problem is a forgone conclusion. For a CEO, it is the very narrow logic of doing whatever it takes to increase profits at my company, for my shareholders, and for my stock options. Get in. Get rich. Get out. But the same narrow focus which would seem to be in the best interests of good business is also at the heart of an economic short-sightedness which can only result in destruction, no matter its best intents.

For example, during economic downturns, when people are spending less money on goods and services, the historically consistent response by any company is to downsize the workforce. Makes sense. You're doing less business, so your labor needs are less. Might as well make cuts there until the economy rebounds. Right? Well, unfortunately, this only works on a small-scale basis. If a handful of companies lay off workers in order to cut expenses, they will indeed benefit in the short term. But, considering this very narrow focus results in a consistent response among all companies, the hoped for benefits never quite materialize. Instead, as layoffs occur nationwide, there is even less money being spent than before, with even less profits, more layoffs ...... repeat. Business becomes a victim of its narrow focus, rather than a beneficiary. Whereas, a more collective sensibility might lead to a collective strategy of increasing the amount of money available for people to spend, increasing profits, etc..
 
Worse, a business will eventually begin to feed upon itself.  In its relentless pursuit of profit a company will, as other options run dry, undermine its own products or services or whatever it was that made them successful in the first place.  We have all seen this at work in our everyday lives and in our everyday frustrations.  A product which suddenly is sold in smaller sizes or portions for the same price.  More packaging (or more air), less product.  Or a product that is being produced with increasingly inferior (and cheaper) materials.  And, be it a service, perhaps less service for more money.  (Failing this, of course, there can simply be hidden fees of which you are unaware, or an increase in the number of fees.)  Such that, within a lifetime, a company and its products become indistinguishable in anything other than its logo from the company which originally attracted us.  Or at the least, a mere shell of what it was in the beginning.

If this occurred only on a small scale, as perhaps a business struggled to get a handle on its own faulty management, it might possibly be seen as one of those "adjustments" that a company must make from time to time in order to regain its focus.  But this is, instead, the pervasive attitude and game plan throughout all of the business world of today.

Big business and Wall Street are forever hungry.  To such an extreme that there is no consideration given to a "sustainable diet" that might keep a society from being "eaten out of house and home".  Instead, a company is expected to generate greater profits this year than last.  And to do it again next year, and the year after.  Those "blue chip" companies which generate consistent profits from one year to the next may have been attractive once upon a time.  But Wall Street is now more interested in making a large amount of money in a short amount of time.   

And for them, companies are no more than a vehicle for creating that wealth, anyway.  The more that can be squeezed out of the business, the better.  Drain every last penny of wealth out of a company and move on.  There's no time for long-term investing.  So if you suck the life blood and the company dies, no worries. It's known in business as "IBG/YBG".  I'll be gone, you'll be gone.  So, who cares?

Perhaps it's time we start to question.  What has this society morphed into in order to support the very narrow goals and vision of business?  Have we become a singular society with the singular purpose of creating wealth?  Are there no other values remaining?  And is our net worth as individuals now limited to nothing more than a financial consideration?  I tend to believe that we, as a society, are concerned with larger questions than profit and loss.  And that we still hold values that seem to no longer find a place in current economic models.  

Perhaps it is when we find the answers to all of these questions that we will also find we want to relegate capitalism and "big business" to the supplemental role it should occupy in our lives and in our societies.  Rather than being the sole purpose and driving force behind every breath that we breathe.  Or the sole value by which we judge a single life.  It's a discussion we need to have.  And I think the time for that discussion is now.