And Today, Matthew Decides He's God...

When you don't have the education, experience or intellect to make your point via informed analysis, well, you can always fall back on your own personal prejudices, can't you?

Which just returns to the point that, though we’re reluctant to admit it in respectable circles in the United States, it’s the money as such that’s the real scandal here. If Lloyd Blankfein were living humbling on $800,000 a year (i.e., 15-20 times the median household income) and donating the rest to charity then I think you’d have to say that what’s good for Goldman Sachs is good for the world. But obviously that’s not what’s taking place. Consequently, I think it’s not quite right to say that nobody is doing anything wrong unless they’re committing actionable fraud. Becoming obscenely wealthy in the business world and then hoarding your money is, itself, morally wrong.It’s just not a critique people are very comfortable offering because obviously even those of us who aren’t making Blankfein bucks are still living higher on the hog than we in principle could.

Once again we see what happens when you take a precocious child who clearly doesn't understand the workings of either economics or capitalism and ask him to comment on events that involve both. And because Matthew is unable to argue his case in economic terms, the fall back is, of course, to simply pronounce the game and the players to be outside the bounds of morality. It's an old and feeble trick of the trade.

Matthew and his ilk love to think of themselves as living in "respectable circles" because they do something other than engage in commerce. They love money every bit as much as people like Lloyd Blankfein, but think it to be in bad taste to make a public show of it. And because they love money, they grow resentful when the consequences of their choice of a career offering modest renumeration manifests itself. We've all met this type, and certainly Matthew is one of them. This sort of resentment runs through his writing like a raging river.

Beyond that, it's worth noting that Matthew went to school at Harvard, and in doing so he crossed paths with many who have gone on to work at places like Goldman Sachs. He didn't like them then, and he doesn't like them now. There's nothing inherently wrong with that judgment, except when one carries it into discussions of public policy. Let's remember this: Much of the support coming from respectable circles for the "reform" of Wall Street has nothing to do with the public and everything to do with the personal. I'll leave it to you to sort out the morality of that.

Comments

[Simon]

Becoming obscenely wealthy in the business world and then hoarding your money is,and then hoarding your money is, itself, morally wrong.

My, my, my what a childish sentence. I bet he wrote Becoming obscenely wealthy in the business world is itself, morally wrong, first and then added and then hoarding your money to give himself a bit of wiggle room, in case he offended any of then bien pensants.

I call it the Soros exception.

[Brett]

"Becoming obscenely wealthy in the business world and then hoarding your money is,and then hoarding your money is, itself, morally wrong."

That's the self-justification of a thief.

[JeffS]

That's the self-justification of a thief.

That's true, Brett, but the current politically correct phraseology is "wealth re-distribution". "Stealing" is so 1990s.

[Bob]

"If Lloyd Blankfein were living humbling on $800,000 a year (i.e., 15-20 times the median household income) and donating the rest to charity then I think you’d have to say that what’s good for Goldman Sachs is good for the world. "

OR we could determine whether or not the things that Goldman Sachs *does* are *good for the world*, ie. beneficial, and leave salary out of it.

[Jim Ryan]

"He is obscenely wealthy" means only "I envy him."

[Richard McEnroe]

The mark of the true con artist is that he can always manufacture an excuse to hate his mark, thus justifying stealing from him.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Bob-

The marketplace has already determined what GS does has worth. Whether it is beneficial is a matter of opinion.

[PDS]

I too am obscenely wealthy.

At least according some folks from Haiti I know.

[hugh hefner]

I am obscenely wealthy.

[Dennis the Peasant]

I'm just obscene.

[Bob]

Dennis -

I agree.

[aelfheld]

I've never known of a rich idiot of Matthew's caliber who had a problem making a public show of the fact. They don't resent wealth - only wealth that isn't theirs.

[TmjUtah]

People who make things work eventually get tired of people who make a living out of bitching about things that don't work the way the bitches think they should.

Somebody should write a book.

[Eric Blair]

Matty's envy is really on display isn't it?

[matthew's older sister]

Investment bankers raking it in- whatever. If they cheat us according to a commonly accepted set of game rules, then prosecute or persecute, or intelligently and ethically (current version seems to be insider scripted high theater designed for regulatory capture) reform the rules. Absent documented fraud or deceit, let them have their yachts and girlfriends.

There are always yachts for anybody to buy, and wimmin. Also, Prius's and tofu. Whatever floats your boat as an exploiter of the system or as an exploiter of the system.

[Raoul Ortega]

Little Matthew and Ezra Klein are just two examples of people who have become quite well off while having just one discernible talent, the ability to persuade the gullible that they are an expert at everything.