I didn't mention this, and maybe tomorrow I'll write about it (note to self): Not all exchanges are equal. Sometimes one person gets a better deal than the other person. Discounts are like that: people give you 50% off because they know you'll do other things with that as well, such as purchase more products (more money for them), get rid of their excess supply (liquidate it), or become a return customer, or even just come to the store in the first place--my point is, even though there are "discounts" there are also things going on behind the surface that you don't see and yet somewhat make up for what looks like a rip off.
Now apply that to me going around to get desserts: Well, let me just say that I'm more loyal to people who have given me desserts and so when it comes time to lay the blame one someone I avoid those people. I also tend to be more inclined to aid people who have helped me in the past. Politicians do it too when they accept campaign donations and etc. etc. --Is it fair? Not always. Can it be avoided? Always.
I will DEFINITELY explain that one tomorrow!
--I made this comment yesterday as an afterthought to my previous post.
Now I'm going to explain what I believe to be true about discounts and trades, as well as the ethics behind paying and accepting bribes.
Discounts occur when someone sells or trades something at a lesser value than it is worth. For starters, you should never give REAL discounts. You shouldn't ever sell or trade anything at a lesser value than it is worth, you should always try to get the exact value of it's worth. Why? Because there's this principle that I call "the principle behind energy". Energy can't be destroyed, when energy disappears it is merely transferring into another form of energy. What about power? --Well power is kinda the same way: it's there, it's just a matter of where it is. When you use power, you're trading something for another thing. What about money? --Same thing, money doesn't ever get destroyed, but where does it flow?
So in order for the world to be fair, we would need perfectly balanced trades. In an ideal world people would pay for products based on their worth: value of the product, the scarcity of the product, the emotional attachment to the product, etc. So when you sell for less, someone benefits from it who doesn't deserve it. --HOWEVER. Most of the time discounts ARE given to products at their exact price because the extra 25% on a 25% discount goes towards the store paying YOU to shop in their store, it goes towards YOU being loyal to them. See, it goes towards other things even though it's a discount. But it's important to understand this, because sometimes people honestly sell things for less than they are worth and they really aren't getting anything from it.
More frequently though, people get things for free that they don't deserve. This is where it becomes incredibly tricky to track the exchange of money or power or whatever: when people give me dessert, are they buying a loyal and beneficial friend or are they giving a hand out to someone who doesn't deserve it?
I try to pay back every good deed people give me as best as I possibly can. I try to be the best friend I possibly can to people who give me things. I really do. Does it always happen?>>no, not always, but I hope those same people get things from me that I make the mistake of giving out for free.
This actually brings up an interesting concept: In what way is it ethical to hoard (and use) all free and cheap things? Well, if you're a utilitarian, as I claim to be, if you take things for free that you need and it allows you to give more free things to other people, then theoretically that would be true. However, it would be incredibly hard to keep track of that. --I would say this is a loophole because it is in fact a true statement and it is a good philosophy to run on in life (I buy into this). But because of the complexity of it, it would be deathly hard to prove the ethics of it, and if someone simply lived their life to not take free hand outs they could be certain of their ethics.
The trouble with loop-holes is that at some point in the loop you have to stop caring and just do it.
Now on to my explanation of bribes and campaign donations. I'll keep this brief: Any kind of donation is perfectly acceptable as long as the donation goes to what the person donating expects it to (the person receiving it is ethical about their use of donation funds) and as long as it is something ethical for them to donate to (meaning it's on a case by case basis). You donate to the starving kids in africa fund because you expect it to help pay for food for those kids. You donate to a politician's campaign because you expect it to help them be elected either because you like the guy, like what he's going to do in office, or whatever.
It is perfectly ethical to use money to trade for things you want, including donations (which are actually just trade offs that you don't see the immediate effect of).
Ahh...such makes the world go round: trading, Buying, selling, true capitalism, gifting, donating, bartering, it's all the same.
If life wasn't this way we'd be in terrible trouble because nothing would be fair (free handouts are not fair and disrupt the system, therefore communism isn't fair, socialism and social systems aren't always fair either).
No comments:
Post a Comment