Jumbo Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I love the smell of class warfare in the morning. :cool: Are Rich People Unethical? http://news.yahoo.com/rich-people-unethical-224915381--abc-news.html Scientists at the University of California at Berkeley analyzed a person's rank in society (measured by wealth, occupational prestige and education) and found that those who were richer were more likely to cheat, lie and break the law than those who were poorer."We found that it is much more prevalent for people in the higher ranks of society to see greed and self-interest … as good pursuits," said Paul Piff, lead author of the study and a doctoral candidate at Berkeley. "This resonates with a lot of current events these days." In the first of two studies, researchers found that those who drove more expensive cars (an admittedly questionable indicator of economic worth) were more likely to cut off other cars and pedestrians at a busy San Francisco four-way intersection than those who drove older, less-expensive vehicles. In other experiments, wealthier study participants were more likely to admit they would behave unethically in a variety of situations and lie during negotiations. In another, researchers found wealthier people were more likely to cheat in an online game to win a $50 prize. <more at link> Well, it is Berkeley. They probably know Predicto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I would think the poor would be just as likely to lie and break the law? But I guess I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 What hath thou wrought, Jumbo/ABC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I would guess the guy with a 100k car has insurance and full coverage. The guy driving a beater has liability. Last thing the guy with the beater wants is to wreck it. I don't know how that really ties into ethics. There is equal crime in the burbs and upscale neighborhoods. Simply not as much violent crime. The perception is skewed by the crimes not being as outwardly obvious to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 As for the point on expensive cars ... the Lexus TV ads would show you that the pompous ******* demographic is smack center in their target market. This isn't necessarily 'rich people' though, it's people who think that the value of their car makes a (positive) statement about them. When I was a young professional, when one of our peers bought a BMW that cost a little more of their disposable income than was prudent, they would be "rewarded" with a t-shirt that said "BMW - for the man who thinks he's arrived". Many successful people are successful because they are "go-getters". Quite often this translates to being insensitive *******s and trampling over anyone in their path. I'm not convinced they are all consciously unethical though. But the cheating game is evidence against that. And lastly, there's the popular saying among go-getters that "you don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate." On a few occasions I've punished people who try to negotiate too much. By pushing your luck you now deserve a lower offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Looks more like the study is looking at greed, and not just wealth. I have two fairly wealthy people in my church who give extravagantly to missions at the drop of the hat, now can I tell if they are greedy outside of my interactions with them, and does anecdotal evidence prove anything? No x2. However, if there are exceptions then it would disprove the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Why does is seem crime is more rampant? We have a shrinking middle class! Stinking rich and poor people...i'm kidding, i think ---------- Post added February-28th-2012 at 10:05 AM ---------- Looks more like the study is looking at greed, and not just wealth. I have two fairly wealthy people in my church who give extravagantly to missions at the drop of the hat, now can I tell if they are greedy outside of my interactions with them, and does anecdotal evidence prove anything? No x2. However, if there are exceptions then it would disprove the rule. Just like anything, there will be exceptions. I tend to think the rich are not mostly unethical, just perceived that way by the ones who "haven't made it". I think jealousy plays a large role in it. I say that because even though I'm a middle class citizen, I see workers jealous of management for very frivolous reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 So people at the top of the ladder had to stab a few people in the back to get there...and we're surprised by this? Empirical data aside, I thought this was commonly accepted knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Well, I've known both rich and poor, and both can be just as prone to breaking the law. Of the rich folks i have known, one of whom is now in prison for embezzlement, and his attitude was what i found typical.. his reasoning was that the government was his enemy (but he loved the country), and it was his right to swindle them out of as much as he could. The fact he swindled so many other people never seemed to creep into his world view. His rants about Bill Clinton and his ethics in the face of what it was discovered he was doing was classic "rich guy entitlement". The poor people i know have been crooks for the same reasons, but the attitude wasn't so much the government as the enemy, it was everyone else. Drug dealers, thugs and thieves, housebreakers I have known in the past pretty much hate everyone. Anger drove most of them, a feeling that it was their right to whatever they wanted because they were bold enough to take it. Then again, some drug dealers I have known haven't felt that way at all, and were just lazy and enjoyed the perks of the job. The hours are pretty good. The prevailing attitude of just about every class of people I have known, it's always been a badge of station to get over. If you can skate by with little effort, or you can cheat someone else, you win. People boast about it. Among lower classes they do it because everyone victimizes everyone else. If you can cheat that guy, you do, and it's his fault. If you can cheat the government and collect welfare when you don't deserve it, you do it because you think you DO deserve it,, not really much different than the rich guy. Among the upper class folks i have known they cheat and do everything they can to get over because they feel it's their right. It's their right to cheat the government, because the government is the enemy. They have the right to cheat you because they have more money, and can. Cheating on taxes isn't even considered cheating by the zillions of people who do it and never think twice. People with jobs collect unemployment. People who believe the gov't should cut expenses will collect disability when they're not disabled. I don't think the lack of ethics is confined to rich or poor. If you see 100 poeople today, you can bet that 40 of them are already getting over on you somehow, via tax fraud, insurance fraud or a million other ways, and another 40would take your wallet if they saw you drop it and no one else did. 10 would hit you over the head for it, and 10 would hand it back to you. As a cynic, i say: ain't no study gonna show me any one side or class is any more scummy than any other. People are inherently corrupt, and the only difference is in method and opportunity. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 As a cynic, i say: ain't no study gonna show me any one side or class is any more scummy than any other. People are inherently corrupt, and the only difference is in method and opportunity. ~Bang Not sure that's exactly cynical, more like being realistic...unless that then makes me cynical...oh dear. I agree with you though, people are what people are, and the poor are in jail just as much as the rich (probably more) the only thing that differentiates them in most cases is the nature of their crimes. And the crimes of the poor are often times not nearly as acceptable as the crimes of the rich, heck most can't even understand the crimes of the rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenspandan Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 i'm not sure it has anything to do with ethical values. it's valid rational decisionmaking -- the kind that goes on behind the scenes in the brain all the time. any decision triggers a subconscious measurement of risk versus reward. there is less risk for a rich person acting unethically in the situations tested in the article. for example, in traffic: when a rich person is faced with knowing he could possibly be fined for breaking the law, it is less significant punishment and therefore a lower overall risk than the same fine poses to a poor person. same goes for the threat of incarceration, because a rich person justifiably believes he has a better chance of further reducing the risk of spending time in jail by applying an expensive lawyer, exploiting his high standing, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I'm not rich, but I definitely would cheat in an online game to win $50. I'm a mold breaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 So people at the top of the ladder had to stab a few people in the back to get there...and we're surprised by this? Empirical data aside, I thought this was commonly accepted knowledge. i believe this isn't an empirical study, but a behaviorial study (ie a lab study rather than a sampling of people in the marketplace). so this puts alot of people in identical lab situations, and then tests their response to "games" (usually). and then groups people by their supplied answers to socie-economic questions and looks for correlations. its kinda interesting and cool, really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I am just amazed the focus when it comes to ethics seems to mostly fall on the "what did they do or what would they do?" So often ethics discussions here in U.S. seem to focus on what is done rather than what is not done. When a lady pulled me an my 2 kids aside as I carried my screaming daughter out of Walmart because she wanted to make sure she was my daughter, I thanked her for her concern. In a crowd of more than 50 people, she was the only person who bothered to ask why this white guy was dragging this screaming black girl out of the store. Now I ask this, "Were the other 49 or so people reacting to the situation in an ethical manner? What if I had been kidnapping her?" I would love to see a breakdown of these reactions by age and wealth. To some extent this is why I like the show, "So what would you do?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 what are these ethics you speak of? study seems biased,just like them rich ****s. special K ...that is simply thinking outside the box Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.