Posted by Mikko on November 03, 2001 at 13:54:53:
In Reply to: Re: Irresponsibility posted by Diarmuid on November 01, 2001 at 08:53:46:
: If it's the same outcome no matter what you do, then that behaviour isn't really irresponsible.
--Same outcome to you personally, but not collectively. Or at least if you don't steal some material meant for constructing a building and let huge amounts of metal get rusty and oxidized there is a chance someone might get that building done. But by doing that you might get some money and not work for pay you can't be sure of getting.
The bottom line - every action has an outcome. I was maybe being a bit too positive about it in order to make my eastern neighbours seem more "decent" as it can be hard to imagine the context for their actions if you don't know. Or even if you do know but haven't experienced.
: I mean the kind of needless wasteful behaviour prevalent in western capitalist countries, primarily the USA.
--*smiles* It's interesting how you can put a political twist to almost any conversation...
: People who have high enough salaries to live well who still go into huge debt, typically to credit card firms (who legally charge huge interest). It's doubly illogical: spending more than you earn on crap that you can't sell later if things get ugly *and* going into debt at extremely high rates.
--Yes, it's illogical, but that's the way people are. It probably is a form of psychological compensation, it's easy to convince many people that they could be even more 'better' if they got just one more thing. And another. Etc.
: My roommate is hugely in plastic debt. He could have borrowed that money from other sources (bank, credit union) at much less ruinous rate. If he had he'd be free now (in fact he's locked in til 2003, fucked if he loses his job, can't ever afford the vacation he so desperately needs). Aside from about five CDs he truly likes, he has nothing to show for that short spending binge (except for an expanded waistline, which depresses the hell out of him).
: Worst thing is, that's tame by American standards.
: To me, it proves that most people are not capitalists. Capital is fundamentally spare money: the extra that's left after you feed, house and pamper yourself which you invest to make more money later.
: If the people of western society were capitalists, they would spend less than they earn, wait five years, then whoop it up on the fruits of their investments. I think I remember some financial discipline study that showed how a man on a modest salary could live, eat, dress well, take a few foreign vacations per year, invest a small portion of his wages and be a millionaire by 35 (of course, that may have involved him only buying microsoft stock but you get the idea).
: That is the logical, natural way to act if the profit system is truly in accordance with human nature.
--So the end result is that no financial system is in accordance with human nature. On the other hand, is becoming really rich good for most people? If you have lots of money, you'd need to use it to benefit from having it. Otherwise you might just as well not have it. Imagine if you had a million dollars of money (extra) and everyone knew you did, wouldn't it change your life quite a bit?
: Aside from some fives (and types with a natural connection to five) this does not happen. Americans in fact spend money they don't have like the bombs are dropping tomorrow, and waste their lives working 70-hour 7-day weeks paying it off, driving themselves into early graves.
--People spending money they don't have is where things go wrong.
: Europeans are increasingly doing likewise. And, unlike the poor bastards in the ex-Soviet states, they *have* a real choice.
--Yes, there are more true choices for Europeans. But most people are trapped in the social context they are in and can't see beyond it. It's a complicated issue.
Mikko