Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Americans seem to be losing a lot of sleep these days trying to decide how they feel about rich people. It seems to me that both liberal and conservative reasoning gets a little tortuous on this point.
In the abstract liberals hate rich people, but in practice they seem to love them, particularly the uber-wealthy (Hollywood stars, George Soros, etc.) who bankroll their favored causes and political campaigns. Conservatives, for their part, say lots of nice things about the rich when we’re discussing taxes and wealth redistribution. On the other hand, whenever we move to the subject of family life, they are quick to pour accusations of greed and materialism on those who puzzle about how to secure a solid income without neglecting caretaking obligations.
I thought it might be interesting, therefore, to approach the question directly. What is the relationship between virtue and wealth? I suspect that there are some ways in which virtue correlates positively to wealth, and other ways in which it correlates negatively.
On the positive end, industry and creativity make it easier to achieve financial success. In general, one must exercise great discipline in order to become rich. Also, the ambitious will need to avoid certain obvious mistakes. Addiction, a messy divorce, or a brush with the law can easily derail the grandest and best-laid of plans. Prudent financial management helps enormously, too. In general, then, we will find that people who amass great wealth are capable, productive, disciplined and able to make sensible life choices.
Now, let’s look at the negative side. I think the plain fact is that generosity and self-sacrifice tend not to propel people to the top. If you want to become fabulously wealthy, you must avoid significant communal or caretaking duties. Don’t have children (or if you must, only have them with a person entirely willing to subordinate other interests to your career); don’t accept an important role within a church or other communal organization; don’t agree to be responsible for ageing parents or grandparents, or others who are sick or vulnerable. Be prepared to sacrifice friendship or other family ties to your career. Also, it probably does help to be a little unscrupulous, if you’re clever about it. Some may protest that honesty is the best policy, but I think the truth is that dishonesty can be quite an asset in temporal affairs, if judiciously and carefully applied. I’ve known more than one person whose potentially glamorous career was dashed on the rocks of too much integrity.
Conservatives love to believe that virtue is rewarded in the natural order of things. This is sometimes true, but frequently untrue, and I think it’s important that we not shy away from the fact that vice is often rewarded in our society, and virtue punished. Not every (socially and morally) healthy choice “pays off” in terms of temporal success, and this should concern us, because it affects people’s choices in a negative way. (Parenthood is the obvious example of something that is not incentivized in our current system, which nonetheless is vitally important to our society’s survival). I think, for the most part, that we cling to the axiom that “the righteous will prosper” as our best line of defense against calls for government intervention. But, of course, government intervention is not the only effective means to creating social change. I think we conservatives could potentially be more consistent in our values if we were more prepared to criticize the rich.
- Comment (95)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Maybe being rich is a matter of luck? Sort of like being a man, woman, North Korean etc....
As conservatives we defend the rich because we are certain they have earned it. Through their virtues or maybe even their vices, but either way they did it themselves. What if this is not the case. What if the ultimate adjudicator of ones success is just plain dumb luck?
I mean we assume that good business men make informed decisions Smart business men make better ones? Thus the cream rises to the top as it were. The economic system we have is a competitive and imperfect replicative system. In such a system you can achieve a wide range of diversity simply through happenstance.
Thus the people who are rich become so because they have taken particular steps to make them so. How or why they took those steps is irrelevant. People choosing randomly would result in the same class structures. Thus you would expect that the distribution of virtues among the rich would be similar to that among the poor.
Apr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Well, but the distributive problem gets much harder if we want to suggest that enormous wealth disparities are fine because people deserve what they earn. There is in all of us an intuition that, as Christ says, the laborer is worthy of his wage. That saying becomes much fuzzier when we're dealing with billionaires. I don't think I really buy that anyone can be per se deserving of that kind of wealth just on the basis of their talents and work ethic. To some extent, they got lucky. It's also not always true that their good fortune hurts nobody else. If they put some small businesses under (for example), that hurt somebody, and the somebody in question isn't necessarily going to be compensated with a shiny new job elsewhere. He may just be dejected and unemployed. At the end of the day, I think the intuitions that cause people to favor wealth redistribution are partly right, although redistribution has many other negative effects. But neither rich nor poor necessarily "deserve" their temporal lot in life.
Nov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Admittedly, "deserving" is hard to measure. What did I do to deserve being born in the USA, instead of 50 miles south of it? What great fortune!
But in our polity, it was decided that it is more fair to let the market decide who "deserves" to get how much, rather than letting the government decide, because we know that letting the government decide will corrupt both the government and the market, and will result in less wealth all around.
Besides being fairer, letting the market decide also generates more wealth for everyone, thus the unprecedented level of general material well-being in the Western Commercial Republics, greater than in any other place or time.
The more serious question is not whether the super-wealthy are corrupted by wealth or by pursuing it, but whether the astoundingly high level of general well-being has softened the mass of citizeny to an extent that makes it too weak a vessel to contain virtue.
Apr '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Astonishing
The more serious question is not whether the super-wealthy are corrupted by wealth or by pursuing it, but whether the astoundingly high level of generalwell-being has softened the mass of citizeny to an extent that makes it too weak a vessel to contain virtue. · 15 minutes ago
Well by historical standards the vast majority of the US is rich. So if the virtues we aspire to are the virtues of 2000 years ago, and in that day and age a certain level of wealth made you a poor receptivity for the containment of these virtues. That level of wealth in absolute terms has been achieved by many more people and a higher percentage of the population.
We all can wear silks, perfumes, makeup, gold jewelry, eat dates, figs, bathe in fine oils, and eat rich spices....by the standards of Jesus day, I a lowly graduate student, live as luxuriously as Herod. At least to a certain degree. Certainly my life style is closer to his than to that of the Apostles in material possessions.
Dec '10
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Rachel Lu: Americans seem to be losing a lot of sleep these days trying to decide how they feel about rich people.
[...]
I think we conservatives could potentially be more consistent in our values if we were more prepared to criticize the rich.
I have to violently (being a rightwinger) disagree in a number of ways. I'll be presumptuous and speak for most conservatives. We're more than willing to criticize the rich -- when they're corrupt (George Soros) or dishonestly advocating damaging policies which will have no effect on them (Warren Buffet). Barack Obama is rich and I believe nearly everything he's done is harmful to the poor either materially (energy prices must necessarily skyrocket) or in virtue (damaged character of the Obamaphone lady).
I lose no sleep over how I feel about the rich. The rich, just like every other group either favored (co-opted for political gain) or demonized (for political gain) by the Left, must be assessed on an individual, case-by-case basis.
"Distributive justice" is the Catholic intellectual's euphemism for centralized planning of virtue. Virtue can only be cultivated by men who are free to behave otherwise. Speaking as a Catholic.
Nov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
You are simply wrong if you mean to suggest that a shoeless self-sacrificing do-gooder does more to benefit society than a person who becomes wealthy through his own efforts.
A person becomes wealthy because he creates great value for others. Not to mention jobs.
Speaking of jobs, if he never gave a dime to charity, Steve Jobs did more to benefit the world than a million Mother Teresas ever could.
If you don't believe me, ask yourself:
How many people's lives have been improved by Steve Jobs's contributions to the world? How many people are incredibly more productive because of him?
Now ask the same questions about Mother Teresa!
Jobs created great value for others. His creations multiply the capacity of others to create wealth by making them more productive (not to mention, better entertained).
I would go so far as to say that Jobs's creations save more lives than Mother Teresa ever could.
Which one is truly more generous?
Edited on October 3, 2012 at 4:45amNov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Valiuth
Astonishing
The more serious question is . . . whether the astoundingly high level of general well-being has softened the mass of citizeny to an extent that makes it too weak a vessel to contain virtue.
. . . by historical standards the vast majority of the US is rich. So if . . . a certain level of wealth made you a poor receptivity for the containment of these virtues, . . . That level of wealth in absolute terms has been achieved by many more people and a higher percentage of the population.
. . . I a lowly graduate student, live as luxuriously as Herod. . . . Certainly my life style is closer to his than to that of the Apostles in material possessions.
Yes.
Iif the Framers erred, it was a failure to include in our polity a corrective against the corrosive effect of widespread weatlh.
I think they expect that religion could be counted on to perform that function. And perhaps they had no idea how magificently successful would be that part of their design aiming at material well-being.
Many assert poverty causes crime, but it might be more true to say that (without religion), poverty is the only thing that can keep the "poor" (in spirit) honest.
Apr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Astonishing
How many people's lives have been improved by Steve Jobs's contributions to the world? How many people are incredibly more productive because of him?
Now ask the same questions about Mother Teresa!
Framing "improved" in physical wealth and production terms is needlessly limited and even kind of silly.
Ask yourself: who's better off, someone in a culture that values charity, mercy and the law, or Rich Tin Pot Dictator of Oilistan the Third?
Apr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Astonishing
I would go so far as to say that Jobs's creationssave more livesthan Mother Teresa ever could.
Which one is truly more generous? · 22 minutes ago
1) Mother T's actions often included pulling those who were dying out of the gutter, cleaning them and treating them with dignity they may have never seen while they passed. How many lives this example saved is hard to measure, as is how many lives itimproved.
2) Generous: to give without expectation of return. Mother Teresa, hands down. Even if one wants to try to claim she expected reward in heaven, for a long time she couldn't feel Him. So that is double-wrong.
Nov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Foxfier
Astonishing
How many people's lives have been improved by Steve Jobs's contributions to the world? How many people are incredibly more productive because of him?
Now ask the same questions about Mother Teresa!
Framing "improved" in physical wealth and production terms is needlessly limited and even kind of silly.
Ask yourself: who's better off, someone in a culture that values charity, mercy and the law, or Rich Tin Pot Dictator of Oilistan the Third?
I reject your silly false choice.
Instead I offer myself as an example of a person whose life was saved by wonderful technology created by the likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and many others, including physicians, who are wealthy and worked hard.
My wife, my child, even my clients, do not think these "improvements" are "limited" to the merely "physical."
It is no coincidence that these livesavers were generated in money-grubbing America and not in impoverished India. Go to MDAnderson hospital and you'll see hundreds like me, not one of whom has ever been benefited by Mother Teresa, materially or in any other way, except perhaps in some highly attenuated mushy-headed abstract sense.
Edited on October 3, 2012 at 2:08amApr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Astonishing
FoxfierFraming "improved" in physical wealth and production terms is needlessly limited and even kind of silly.
Ask yourself: who's better off, someone in a culture that values charity, mercy and the law, or Rich Tin Pot Dictator of Oilistan the Third?
I reject your silly false choice.
I didn't offer a choice, I offered examples of the two extremes; extreme physical well-being without moral wellbeing, vs a culture that has moral well-being. Left unsaid is that in one with moral well being, you can expect to be able to keep what you earn, even if you're not strong, and be helped if disaster happens.
It is funny that you jumped to the conclusion that I was offering a false choice, though, since that is what your Gates-or-Teresa choice was. Even framed as a comparison, it's unfair-- you compare the effect of Gates and everyone he hired or inspired to work to the living labors of Blessed Teresa as a single person.
Nov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Foxfier
Astonishing
I reject your silly false choice.
I didn't offer a choice, I offered examples of the two extremes; . . .
your Gates-or-Teresa choice . . . Even framed as a comparison, it's unfair-- you compare the effect of Gatesand everyone he hired or inspired to work to the living labors of Blessed Teresa as a single person.
I fairly compared the extremes of two possible ways of benefitting others: productive paid work versus charity work. You responded with the inapt silly false choice of Teresa versus dictator.
A free market society that encourages the development of men like Jobs generates sufficient wealth for everyone so there is no need of a Teresa to go around "pulling [the] dying out of the gutter, cleaning them," whereas an army of Teresas, no matter how blessed, will be insufficient to ameliorate the misery that otherwise exists.
Whence the soap Teresa used to clean the dying? Better from a soap factory with efficient computer-managed production processes? Or by handmaking? Or by miracle? (And whence the money to buy it?)
Edited on October 3, 2012 at 4:20amNov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Foxfier
Astonishing
How many people's lives have been improved by Steve Jobs's contributions to the world? How many people are incredibly more productive because of him?
Now ask the same questions about Mother Teresa!
Framing "improved" in physical wealth and production terms is needlessly limited and even kind of silly.
Ask yourself: who's better off, someone in a culture that values charity, mercy and the law, or Rich Tin Pot Dictator of Oilistan the Third? ·
On futher consideration, I believe the proper and more succinct response to your false choice is: What the heck does the Dictaror of Oilistan have to do with it and why are you trying to drag him into the argument?
My comparison of Teresa and Jobs was meant to respond to an implication that people who concentrate on rumunerative efforts and become wealthy are selfish.
If they are selfish, and I do not believe they are, they are nonetheless more beneficial to society than shoeless do-gooders who do not produce enough to maintain even their own lives and depend entirely upon charity from productive people to fund the charitable activity the shoeless do-gooders take credit for.
Edited on October 3, 2012 at 4:43amApr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Astonishing, here are my main points to you:
1) I don't think we can just say that "it was decided" to let the market determine what people deserve. Our country certainly doesn't respect that principle now, and a large percentage of the population (I'd venture to say a good majority) seems not to think that it should. That's precisely why we end up talking about this so much.
2) The comparison between Jobs and Blessed Mother Theresa seems kind of dumb to me. Mother Theresa inspired millions and brought hope to the souls of countless desperate people. Steve Jobs brought really cool computers and phones to millions. I'm not sure if job creation is the best accomplishment to lay at his door since, as I understand it, Apple is a fairly small company employee-wise. Anyway, it's very apples and oranges. And Steve Jobs was quite an unusual case; most fabulously wealthy people are nowhere near as uniquely talented as him.
3) There are good reasons for not heavily regulating markets. But why insist that the resulting distribution is just? That doesn't seem to follow, and indeed, it seems quite incredible to me.
May '10
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Paul Graham posted an essay where he argues that the surest path to success for a startup is to please your users by being completely altruistic. The idea is that the more that you give your users for as low a price (free usually), the more you will undercut your competition and grow your user base, (thereby getting bought out by a big company who wants your users). Since a successful startup equals becomming rich, this argument is worth pursuing.
Apr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Astonishing
What the heck does the Dictaror of Oilistan have to do with it and why are you trying to drag him into the argument?
Extremely well off in the physical, easy to identify manner vs well off in a situational, moral, harder to track and identify manner.
One is doing well, right now, but can lose it very easily if someone stronger comes along. The other may not be doing so well right now, but if they work hard, they don't have to worry about someone else taking it all away. That is very much a matter of morality improving physical conditions, but your false choice acted as if they were opposed, rather than a Gates needing a situation caused by the Teresas. The opposite of a Teresa is a glorified thief or thug, not someone who works hard to a goal and doesn't mind lifting boats besides his own.
And no, I didn't compare random immoral rich guy to Teresa as you claimed.
Jul '10
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
That is an excellent point. In our first year we were extremely aggressive on price. Sure I want to be liked by my customers, but that wasn't why. We needed to make a splash in a tough market and (along with our location and service) price was our best means. We created a buzz, and then cut prices even lower the next year when our much larger competitors responded (one with a simple across-the-board margin cut, the other with a typically corporate overly complicated scheme) because we were invested in our rep.
I'll take a bit of issue with your last sentence, though. Success isn't getting rich. Success is the ability to pay when you're on the hook for the bills.
Edited on October 3, 2012 at 5:35amNov '11
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Saintly, I will resist the temptation to say what you have asserted seems "kind of dumb to me."
Instead I will say things you might think even dumber:
Blessed Mother Teresa is but a middleman, producing extremely little of value herself, but merely taking the wealth produced by others and redistributing it to the poor, but first skimming off a little or a lot to maintain herself and her nunnery, because they are so unproductive as not to produce enough value to support themselves. Taking credit for redistributing what others produce, she is a called blessed.
The man who works hard at his job; produces value that is only just a little more than he consumes (thereby leaving the unconsumed portion as a benefit to the rest of humanity); feeds, shelters, and clothes his family by dint of his own honest work; and puts only one single wrinkled bill in the collection plate on Sunday, is a greater benefactor to mankind than the shoeless do-gooder who produces not even the clothes on her own blessed back! Yet he is called selfish!
Apr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
Speaking as a Catholic, I think we should hang onto the idea of distributive justice if Aristotle and St. Thomas and many other important Catholic thinkers identify it as one of the primary components of justice. It needn't necessarily be about centralized planning. Why are conservatives always so quick to conclude that any discussion of how people ought to live must come back to government intervention? There are other methods of attaining a just society.
Apr '12
Re: Does Virtue Make You Rich?
If that's all you can see in Mother Theresa, Astonishing, then it's hard to know what else to say except... man does not live by bread alone.