[ZombieLamb]

I remember reading that money is generally not one of intp's top priority but do any of you guys do investments or what not? I find it intriguing to see where I can invest my money into for potential growth but I never really spend any of the money that accumulates from the earnings. It feels almost like a game to me.

[Lucem]

Money is a means to an end not an end in itself.

But playing money games is interesting, optimising profits.

[Saint]

Personally I just see money as a prop for a play. Unfortunately living in a modern society we are forced to role play, with money spearheading the reason we are in it. That being said, I have no money to do anything with anyway...

[nevermore]

Not a priority at all. I am a bit of an aesthete and practically bleed money on whimsical purchases, though. So it SHOULD be a priority. I'd be comfortable living with very little, though.

[Sed Non Satiata]

Money is for spending. That's about as far as my concept of it has evolved so far.

Now, if you want to start talking about the effects of neoliberal economics on the wholesale destruction of other countries simply to profit the new American elite class, that would be a different conversation...

[sensorium]

Money was supposed to facilitate exchanges - dragging a cow with you for barter is rather inconvenient.

Somehow it ended up being a carrot on a stick. A means of control.

I can understand why some would find money-making engaging. I remember I used to play EVE - I had fun trading. But in EVE resources were infinite. Nobody had to starve or die for it.

[Miracle Shooter]

Money was supposed to facilitate exchanges - dragging a cow with you for barter is rather inconvenient.

Somehow it ended up being a carrot on a stick. A means of control.

I can understand why some would find money-making engaging. I remember I used to play EVE - I had fun trading. But in EVE resources were infinite. Nobody had to starve or die for it.

Unfortunately there exist people in this world who couldn't care less about people suffering for their gains and their enjoyments so long as it doesn't immediately bite them in the rear.

[ZombieLamb]

Unfortunately there exist people in this world who couldn't care less about people suffering for their gains and their enjoyments so long as it doesn't immediately bite them in the rear.

This reminds me of a study I read before. People where there were two groups, both anonymous to each other. One group (call it player one) was given 20 bucks and allowed to offer either half of it to the other group(call it player two) or just 2 bucks while keeping the other 18 to themselves. It turned out that 3 out of every four participant gave half of it away. A recreation of the experiment but allowing the player one to give any amount of donation away, they generally gave average of about 4 bucks.

A later experiment had the same rules but added an additional clause where they could give any amount of money or instead take a dollar from player two. Under this version only 35% gave any money to player two, 45% didn't give anything and 20% took a dollar.

A third experiment both players were given the same amount of money, but player one was told that they could steal the entire payment of player two or give any amount to player two. 10 percent of gave money to player two while more than 60% took from player two.

The last version of this experiment, the guy in charge of the experiment needed some envelopes stuffed for another experiment. So now both players had to work for the money and the same rules from the third experiment was in place. This time only 28% of player one took from player two, instead of the prior 60%. And Two-Thirds neither gave nor took a penny.

[Miracle Shooter]

So the last experiment entails people doing work for the money before giving the option of giving and taking money?

28% is quite significant. Even if you scale it up to large MNCs and drop the percentage to 10% that's still a lot of exploitation going on. :o Since you know large companies have wide range and can exploit on a larger scale to fill the pockets of the CEOs.

[ZombieLamb]

So the last experiment entails people doing work for the money before giving the option of giving and taking money?

28% is quite significant. Even if you scale it up to large MNCs and drop the percentage to 10% that's still a lot of exploitation going on. :o Since you know large companies have wide range and can exploit on a larger scale to fill the pockets of the CEOs.

Yea, I think the last experiment was suppose to suggest that when a person comes into some money honestly and believes that another person has done the same, he neither gives away what he earned nor takes what doesn't belong to him.