<p>Agree, SBmom, </p>
<p>But it’s just more of the same: </p>
<p>having so much wealth handed to you spawns a lack of initiative, which is the same as laziness plus (probably) gluttony at some level which is unethical (on a personal level and, I think, even on a societal level).</p>
<p>“The point, ladies and gentlemen, is that greed – for lack of a better word – is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms – greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge – has marked the upward surge of mankind.”
-Gordon Gekko (played by Michael Douglas in the world’s greatest film - Wall Street)</p>
<p>there is nothing wrong with the pursuit of wealth. As long as one realizes that 1. It’s not going to make you happy 2. once you attain it you have the responsibility to use some of your wealth to help those that did not have the opportunity to pursue it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My response:</p>
<p>For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? </p>
<p>Mark 8:36</p>
<p>I agree with momof2inca, there is nothing wrong with money or having money, because money in an of it self has never done anything to any one. However it is the love of money and what people will do to attain is that is the root of all evil. Gordon, didno’t have a problem selling others out as long as it did not change how he was living</p>
<p>Many Wall Street types lack the basic ethics to justify any wealth they gain. It’s all about selling crap to suckers–except they don’t put it so nicely.</p>
<p>I have to confess. I used to be very much in the camp of wealth is bad. Of course, I grew up with it so I had the luxury. Now, having married someone who did not choose to maximize his earning potential but rather do good for humanity, I find I have changed my mind.</p>
<p>I liked growing up rich. I liked having a beautiful house. I liked having unique art on the walls. I liked traveling in Europe. And as an adult, once it became clear I had to either give that all up or else start to work my butt off, I chose the work my butt off route. I like beauty. It is frequently expensive.</p>
<p>I don’t run around showing off all that much, largely because I don’t like uncomfortable clothes. But, I have gone to the dark side. I bought a pair of Chanel sunglasses. To date I have not begun to torture animals, light fires, or wet my bed - the signs of incipient serial killers.</p>
<p>And I no longer feel that people who decide wealth doesn’t matter have the lock on righteousness. There are many paths to the circle of the righteous. And many hypocritical paths to the circle of the not-so-righteous.</p>
<p>I know as many people who apparently are as PC as possible and yet are nasty gossips or small-minded, all the while appearing to be so liberal and humanitarian, as I know rich people who work hard who are greedy and without a moral compass. And it’s possible to work hard and start a business and keep your moral compass. Maybe you aren’t giving it all away, maybe you are clear that business is business and your job is to make a profit, maybe you aren’t saving the world, but you can set an example of living and working and keeping your values front and center.</p>
<p>Evil people can be evil in many ways. Good people can be good in many ways.</p>
<p>Great post, Alu; I agree.</p>
<p>I too got to the ‘give it up or work my butt off’ crossroads.</p>
<p>And I am also working my butt off (but sadly, it is still bigger than what would be ideal.)</p>
<p>I do, however, credit my mom & dad for instilling a strong work ethic in me. Basically, nobody should feel entitled to “have it all” without working honestly for it. Obviously a system that made it impossible to get wealthy no matter what would kill one’s initiative too.</p>
<p>SBMom. Thanks. I agree about the strong work ethic. We were always taught that the most important thing was doing the best job you could. My sister, BTW, has a Ph.D. in social policy and works on mother and child health and welfare, my brother a therapist, my other sister a Ph.D. in education working for a foundation in Southern California, so I am the only capitalist among us:).</p>
<p>I liked growing up solidly middle class. I liked our tract home. I liked jumping on the living room couch and stacking up the furniture to make forts. (I’m not so sure rich kids are allowed to be so cavelier with the household furniture). I liked raising my own kids in another tract home in the kind of neighborhood where the neighbors are outdoors working on their own cars in their driveways. Where people stand out in the middle of the street to chat, and where everyone has watched each other’s kids grow up. I like having a car that I can leave unlocked in any part of town - one that no one would think was worth stealing or breaking into. I like setting my own hours. I like being able to take breaks from work whenever I feel like it. </p>
<p>The house is full of clutter and junk that is worth nothing to anyone else, but has special meaning to me. Cheaply framed pictures of my kid’s kindergarten artwork, photos of the kids and family mounted in those cheap plastic box frames. A few “nice” things too - but nothing that I would shed tears over if it were damaged or stolen. Lots and lots of books - probably not much room for other decor amid all the books. </p>
<p>Oh, I like traveling to Europe, too. I really love discount air fares and hostelworld.com and hunting for cheap package deals on travelocity and finding all the cheap places to eat in European cities.</p>
<p>And I like cheap sunglasses. The thing I really like is that when I inevitably lose them or sit on them and break them, I don’t really care. 
</p>
<p>Yesterday I lost my watch. I couldn’t find it anywhere. I thought, “drat, now I’ll have to spend $20 to replace it.” Then I found it. </p>
<p>So I guess I am very, very glad that I did NOT grow up rich. I am glad I didn’t grow up poor either. One thing you get from having it all, but having it all on the cheap, is the understanding that you don’t need all that much money to maintain a comfortable life stye. The refrigerator is well stocked with the foods we liked, we eat out quite often, we buy new clothes when we feel we need them. Daughter just bought a pair of pointy-toed high heels for $3 from Ebay — if its any consolation, they arrived in a box with a Nordstrom’s label.</p>
<p>Alumother - I would nominate your post #45 for a Coward Writing award, but I seemed to be the only one nominating after awhile, so gave it up.</p>
<p>Still, the wisdom in your posts so often bowls me over that I really must thank you. I am a member of your (hopefully) Mutual Admiration Society.</p>
<p>
Now, how exactly do we get here? We can assume, I gather, that if I have substantially more assets than my father or my immigrant grandparents (who had nothing) that I, per se, am less ethical than they? Is it obvious that Oprah (to use the exemplar oft-cited here) has compromised her ethics to achieve and obtain what she has? I, for one, am solidly in her fan club for what she has done and is doing with her voice and her $$. I am mystified by the equation some are blithely drawing here between high income/assets and low ethics.</p>
<p>Jmmom, why bother replying to drivel? You go Alumother! The amazing thing? They believe it. My favorite part is that rich kids can’t jump on furniture.</p>
<p>Calmom, I can tell you liked how you grew up. I can feel your affection. That’s the point. That’s the goal. Because however much money a family has, the point is how is the family? My family, though rich, was very child-centered (probably too much since my parents divorced eventually:)). So while we couldn’t jump on the living room furniture my dad inherited from his mother, we had a playroom. And we jumped a lot. And my mom made dinner every night, and sat on our beds and rubbed our backs before we went to sleep, and dad drove us to school every morning. And even though my parents are divorced, we four kids are still very very close and remember our childhood with the same affection as you feel for yours. So we spent a Christmas vacation in Jamaica and another in Hawaii and another in Mexico. I promise the values of my family were still not superficial. I mean, look at my brothers and sisters doing good:).</p>
<p>It’s possible that wealth, in a family that commits to a certain set of values, just means that the sentimental artifacts are likely to be sterling silver ice tea spoons with long thin handles that are tubes for using as straws. Or silver grape scissors. Or linen sheets. And wealth in certain families can also mean a tradition of philanthropy. </p>
<p>Just trying to carry on the usual crusade against blanket judgements.</p>
<p>BTW, Jmmom, you are so warm and so nice. How could anyone not be a fan? Your S and grandS are lucky kids.</p>
<p>An unusual take on wealth and privilege in a review of the book “Privilege” (which, I should add, I was not raised withmiddle class all the way):</p>
<p>Even if this is not convincing, even if the meritocratic elite begin with privilege, was that privilege not, at least today, earned by previous generations, precisely so they could bequeath it to their descendants? As John Adams wrote, I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain. Didnt my grandparents and parents immigrate, surmount xenophobia, accrue debt, join the military, climb out of poverty, attend school and work hard precisely so I could comfortably sit here and write self-indulgent, introspective sentences like this one?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.dartreview.com/archives/2005/06/12/ross_douthat_explores_harvard_the_iviest_of_the_ivy_league.php[/url]”>http://www.dartreview.com/archives/2005/06/12/ross_douthat_explores_harvard_the_iviest_of_the_ivy_league.php</a></p>
<p>zagat - you are so right
Alumother - solidarity to we who believe we can maintain a sense of values, moral purpose and ethics despite having earned a good living. I even know a woman of inherited wealth, who (gasp!) embodies all that I hold dear in the raising of her family and contribution to the community.
FountainSiren - thank you for the quote, which says it <em>almost</em> as well as Alumother :)</p>
<p>I pledge not to post any more in response to what zagat so aptly called drivel. Not worthy of a response.</p>
<p>It is troubling that so many equate wealth with lack of morals and ethics. There is a major lack of understanding between groups in our Country today. I grew up in a home where it was assumed that wealth came only on the backs of others. It took me until adulthood, acquiring some wealth of my own, to lose this particular prejudice. This is just another hate, another ignorance, one I’m afraid many are passing on to another generation.</p>
<p>kirmum - beautifully put. I can only hope you are being heard.</p>
<p>I found myself thinking about this thread while driving around today.</p>
<p>There’s a old old line: “I’ve been rich and I’ve been poor, and believe me, rich is better.”</p>
<p>I think there’s several different kinds of rich. </p>
<p>1) There’s inherited do-nothing money (Paris Hilton). Let’s abandon that topic.</p>
<p>2) There’s done-extremely-well-from-middle-class-start money, such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and numerous others who are less wealthy but still have way more than they’ll ever need. These people are lucky, shrewd, and smart. We have a good friend who falls in this category. He’s started several businesses, some failures and some successes. But he’s always working every angle. I have high hopes that he’ll take my kids in for a summer–because my kids just don’t see the angles the way he does. From the outside, it may look easy, but he spends every single minute thinking about more ways to make money.</p>
<p>3) Very careful saving and spending over a lifetime. These are the people who put away 15-20% of every paycheck, and suddenly–at age 50 to 55 or so–they have a few houses they rent out, a comfortable income stream from investments, and they quietly retire or go on working until their pension comes payable. You meet a surprisingly large number of these people working in local government or teaching. This kind of wealth is accessible to anyone who is willing to take the time and live frugally enough to put aside some of every paycheck. </p>
<p>4) Right place, right time money, such as those who put money into dot.coms and sold at the peak. Too much luck to be predictable.</p>
<p>The true irony of the anti wealth sentiment on this site is that many of those expressing it have kids in $40.000/yr schools getting financial aid. Who’s money is it anyway?</p>
<p>jmmom,
Actually, I think Oprah probably did compromise her ethics many times in her initial rise to fame and success. Her original talk shows were quite sensationalist and seemed to serve the public’s basest entertainment needs (aka Jerry Springer). However, as someone stated in an earlier post, she was able to succeed because she had and has kept a “common touch” and an impressive empathy for humanity. Her shows greatly evolved in the late 90s, as it seems did her spiritual understanding of what it means to have great material wealth. </p>
<p>As for whether I am less ethical than my poor immigrant Irish great-grandmother who fled the Potato Famine? I’m not sure. In my experience, I have found that poor people are relatively more generous and acutely tuned in to others’ needs than those with wealth are. They are often the first to pitch in even with what little they have. I, on the other hand, have probably turned a blind eye to more needy people than my ggmother ever did, even though my standard of living is far higher than she could have dreamed. In this sense, her ethics would be better than mine. I’m more selfish. (But, yeah, I’m not a murderer or thief or anything, sheesh.)</p>
<p>But Kirmum, we are talking about the uberwealthy, not the upper middle class. Sam Walton, of Walmart fame. I admire his business smarts, but his company really is making a killing on the backs of poor employed people. His employees in Las Vegas, for example, can’t afford health insurance and they end up in huge debt to the hospital ER for illnesses that could have been prevented had the company lowered its profits by forking over some Blue Cross plans and taking care of “the family.” Walmart corporate executives make a killing. Do they deserve it? Do their stock clerks and cashiers deserve a living wage and regular doctor’s visits? Do the boutique store owners that every new Walmart puts out of business deserve to keep their businesses? Do people need to be able to buy $3 shirts and at what macro-cost to other people in this country and abroad? Capitalism marches on. Some capitalists become uber rich. It’s a free country for that sort of thing. I just don’t find it very palatable at the extreme ends, and yeah, I think to upset the balance of nature to that degree requires some degree of ethical lapses on the way up.</p>
<p>I don’t hate Walton, Gates, Oprah. Not in the least. I don’t hate the kids today whose major goal (collegiate and otherwise) is to become rich. I just think there is a higher ground to be had and fought for, and, once you get past the subsistence level, the battle is mostly with oneself and boils down to this: how much is enough for me.</p>
<p>We all know how much more there is to be had. </p>
<p>And no, Fountain Siren, I don’t think my immigrant ancestors sacrificed so I could sit here and write self-indulgent, introspective sentences like these. I don’t know for sure, but I think they were like me, they sacrificed so their kids and descendants could do their part in fixing a broken world, by helping to educate, correct bad policy, heal people, etc… My strongest desire for my children is that they leave the world better than they found it. Maybe that’s the same as an uberwealthy person… maybe not.</p>
<p>I think many of the comments on this thread are not about the uber rich, but heck folks, it’s no different if they are. There is a divide, a lack of tolerance, a prejudice based on money that is every bit as vile as one based on skin color. To assume lack or morals or ethics is associated with dollars is every bit as ignorant as assuming a balck man is more likely to steal. Income profiling. Driving while wealthy.</p>