The Entrepreneur Forum | Financial Freedom | Starting a Business | Motivation | Money | Success

Welcome to the only entrepreneur forum dedicated to building life-changing wealth.

Build a Fastlane business. Earn real financial freedom. Join free.

Join over 80,000 entrepreneurs who have rejected the paradigm of mediocrity and said "NO!" to underpaid jobs, ascetic frugality, and suffocating savings rituals— learn how to build a Fastlane business that pays both freedom and lifestyle affluence.

Free registration at the forum removes this block.

Are moral standards scripted for the poor?

Are morals making you poor?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

OleksiyRybakov

Bronze Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
78%
Aug 25, 2021
186
145
Germany
If you have the mindset that you only cross the road when the light is green then nothing gets done, and probably you are best suited working for a government bureaucracy.
I think that people with such a mindset and without the ability to think strategically should not work in and for governments either.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
If you have a problem with an industry you can choose not to do it.

But I think you have framed the title (are morals scripted for the poor) in a such way that you have an assumption that rich people made money by screwing others which is entirely the opposite from the truth.

On average, people who have any success in business on likely to be far more ethical than the average employee, on the “altruism vs selfishness” index

An employee gets paid by showing up. A business gets paid when they have proved their value to the eye of the payor. It is a much higher bar to climb.

Just because you sell a “sin good” like alcohol, doesn’t mean that you will make more money than selling something less sinful. There is always competition in every field. So the premise of “less ethical and hence more money made” is just wrong in every way.
Hmm interesting thanks for your input, but to a certain degree they agreed that they are offering something ‘not good’ since they skew that feature as a fast lane book by offering Coke Zero and digital cigarettes. Maybe this question is better if both computer was tasked to make money which will make more? The one with moral codes or the one without?
 

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
I don’t want to be rude to OP, but this is the total opposite mindset of a successful person. The premise is wrong and the topic is pointless. Change your mindset while you still can.
Hey man no worries my skin is very thick! I’d say morals doesn’t have a deciding impact on making money. Just that are times products that sell or have value to people are labelled ‘bad’ or ‘evil’ in a culture. If two computers are task to make money which will make more? The one with moral codes or the one without? Yeah I voted yes because the one without is going to have a wider range and more focused on making money by chance.
 

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
I
You can choose not to sell candies.

There is no reason to believe that because candies harm people and therefore you will make more money selling candies.

There are competition in all fields.
I can sell healthy candy with no sugar then I can market it as ‘good’ candy :D
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Mattie

Platinum Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
129%
May 28, 2014
3,485
4,490
53
U.S.
I still don’t understand what the OP is asking LOl. Seriously. The question makes no sense to me and I can’t even vote. So, I guess I agree with what you said @thechosen1
There are some false beliefs out there projected with the idea in general that are mixed messages in certain social groups, populations, or cultures about what is unethical and immoral in obtaining financial wealth. Some of this might be Myths, theories, concepts, or ideas that people may just believe and pass on to others versus legit information. Fake News so to speak. Beliefs have an expiration date. I suppose it's whether you have a fixed mindset, or a growth mindset.

I watched a documentary one time on a football player that one a scholarship and had a chance to leave the Applachian Mountains. He did for a short-time and went back. This is where some individuals don't believe they should leave the lower class mindset and should remain loyal. If you live in places where there is no toilets, running water, and have a chance to leave, it might be immoral or unethical in their belief system. Fortunately, giving up the chance of a lifetime is the downfall once the exit is given for an 18 year old.

The person is young, impressionable, and who knows if they eventually found the courage to rise out of the situation.

The question is always is the story true, or false? Immoral or unethical can be subjective.

I've even tried to help people who are too emotionally attached to certain circumstances or people, and they just were not ready or equipped to handle to the change in their life at the time. People have to be ready to change, or they will not budge from their beliefs on just about anything in life.

Whenever you believe something there is always someone that cannot imagine what your talking about can be correct since they never experienced something. When they experience it, then they will see differently.

It was a terrible thing to smoke marijuana or sell it in 1989, now it's quite different in 2021. Moral or Immoral? We seem to change our opinion on some things over time.
 

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
You mean the part about being rude? But do you agree or disagree?

(also, no I really was serious that it wasn’t a shot at OP - it was about changing this mindset to anyone reading)

be direct man! Haha
Well this is the problem with modern culture, disagreeing with people and speaking for yourself doesn’t make you rude, so far it see it you’re a great person!
 

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
There are some false beliefs out there projected with the idea in general that are mixed messages in certain social groups, populations, or cultures about what is unethical and immoral in obtaining financial wealth. Some of this might be Myths, theories, concepts, or ideas that people may just believe and pass on to others versus legit information. Fake News so to speak. Beliefs have an expiration date. I suppose it's whether you have a fixed mindset, or a growth mindset.

I watched a documentary one time on a football player that one a scholarship and had a chance to leave the Applachian Mountains. He did for a short-time and went back. This is where some individuals don't believe they should leave the lower class mindset and should remain loyal. If you live in places where there is no toilets, running water, and have a chance to leave, it might be immoral or unethical in their belief system. Fortunately, giving up the chance of a lifetime is the downfall once the exit is given for an 18 year old.

The person is young, impressionable, and who knows if they eventually found the courage to rise out of the situation.

The question is always is the story true, or false? Immoral or unethical can be subjective.

I've even tried to help people who are too emotionally attached to certain circumstances or people, and they just were not ready or equipped to handle to the change in their life at the time. People have to be ready to change, or they will not budge from their beliefs on just about anything in life.

Whenever you believe something there is always someone that cannot imagine what your talking about can be correct since they never experienced something. When they experience it, then they will see differently.

It was a terrible thing to smoke marijuana or sell it in 1989, now it's quite different in 2021. Moral or Immoral? We seem to change our opinion on some things over time.
Sir, you are a wise man! I’m not a fan for picking sides too, but to make it interesting I made a 50/50 vote since it’s more of a attractive post since people will assign themselves in one camp and express their views. Like they have something to ‘fight’ for I feel this is very interesting and not sure we are educated this way or it’s human nature. As for my vote I’d explain again if you have a gun to my head and ask which will make more money with ‘moral codes’ or not I’d say without since it has a wider range.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

fastlaner_1992

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
82%
Nov 8, 2018
49
40
Hello Din here, Found the book and forum yesterday, I consider myself quite awake yet MJ’s book got my stubbornness for working years on my art passion and nothing clicks,

Back to the topic it has been on my mind that the people in control are not ‘educated’ by moral standards.

Are Coca-Cola going to feel bad killing tons of people with sugar?

Are doctors(some) going to feel bad selling you on the most expensive plan to cure you while there are cheaper ways?

The more I look I find more examples like get people addicted on pain killers?
The market just makes money it has no time for morals, perhaps morals are keeping me poor?

up for discussion,
Din
I believe we should ultimately try to do good because it makes us feel better. When we come into business we need to still maintain many of those characteristics but we need to also understand that to survive we have to consume and compete and implement many harsher character traits.

A lion doesn't feel anything towards the gazelle that it kills, much like Ray croc describing he would put a hose in his competitions mouth if they were drowning.

Being good doesn't mean you have to be a jacked up person in business but being in business means we can't always be nice.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

fastlaner_1992

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
82%
Nov 8, 2018
49
40
So the ‘rich’ made selling questionable items legal by writing their own laws I think. I get your point sir but I always have second thoughts when I see that poor guy lose all his money gambling.
For me it's also where you look at it all from, because that same person losing may be the catalyst for something greater he was designed and had the potential to achieve.

"only when it is dark enough can you see the stars"

I like to believe we come to this experience (earth - life) to navigate through polarity to become self actualized and the only way to fully understand you potential is to have the opposite factors in place, i.e. poverty and lack etc.

Also because we are an evolutionary adaptation there will most likely in the foreseeable future still be people who win (rich) and people who lose (poor). But we can change and become the predator not the hunter.

Until another evolutionary adaptation happens, by then we most likely will be long gone.

To sum it up, you can be spiritual and do the "right thing" and be extremely wealthy.
 

Disciple96

Bronze Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
133%
Mar 5, 2016
147
196
USA
I voted yes, but the question is kind've loaded.

For instance, if you were to ask... "does being moral lock you out of profitable action?" then I would say yes. But as it is written, I probably should've voted no.

regardless. I think my version is closer to what you meant based on OP.

Having a moral compass and abiding it means you WILL necessarily have to stop yourself from making decisions that others, who aren't so moral, would have no issue with.

That means, in contrast to an amoral person (not an immoral one) you would be more "picky" or "perfectionist"... "my solution isn't good enough"

an amoral person wouldn't care that they're not perfect enough. and an immoral person would try to cheat and shortcut.

Immorality is bad for business... amorality is bad for the spirit... and morality is the narrow path.
 

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
From my understanding, every business or almost has some skeletons in their closet and they might not make the best "moral" decisions all the time because business isn't perfect.
I guess that’s what PR and marketing are for. Like the jockey club donates a lot to gamble addiction support.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Dino_saur

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
67%
Nov 10, 2021
39
26
I voted yes, but the question is kind've loaded.

For instance, if you were to ask... "does being moral lock you out of profitable action?" then I would say yes. But as it is written, I probably should've voted no.

regardless. I think my version is closer to what you meant based on OP.

Having a moral compass and abiding it means you WILL necessarily have to stop yourself from making decisions that others, who aren't so moral, would have no issue with.

That means, in contrast to an amoral person (not an immoral one) you would be more "picky" or "perfectionist"... "my solution isn't good enough"

an amoral person wouldn't care that they're not perfect enough. and an immoral person would try to cheat and shortcut.

Immorality is bad for business... amorality is bad for the spirit... and morality is the narrow path.
Yes, very glad you understand why I have this question and interested to see everyone’s take on it, it’s far more complicated then a yes no question!
 

LiveEntrepreneur

Silver Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
79%
Aug 17, 2017
728
574
Australia
From my understanding, every business or almost every business has some skeletons in their closet and they might not make the best "moral" decisions all the time because business isn't perfect.
I guess that’s what PR and marketing are for. Like the jockey club donates a lot to gamble addiction support.
Yeah a lot of marketing is definitely not ethical / morally right, like a lot of those Shopify gurus on YouTube are a great example.
 

Kevin88660

Platinum Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
118%
Feb 8, 2019
3,456
4,078
Singapore
By and large the more ethical you are the better profit it is. By and large.

Because if you believe in capitalism and value creation, this is fundamentally true.

Most money are not made by genius moves, but by doing shit work that no one wants to do, taking personal risk that others do not want.

You took up a risk in starting a business. If you fail, your capital goes to zero and you have worked for free. If You succeed, you provide a better product at same cost or a similar product at lower cost to the benefit of the consumers.

What could be more ethical than that?
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Disciple96

Bronze Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
133%
Mar 5, 2016
147
196
USA
By and large the more ethical you are the better profit it is. By and large.

Because if you believe in capitalism and value creation, this is fundamentally true.

Most money are not made by genius moves, but by doing shit work that no one wants to do, taking personal risk that others do not want.

You took up a risk in starting a business. If you fail, your capital goes to zero and you have worked for free. If You succeed, you provide a better product at same cost or a similar product at lower cost to the benefit of the consumers.

What could be more ethical than that?
I think the bigger question is when it's not so cut and dry.

Monsanto could argue they provide "value".

The point here is that "value" is subjective and sometimes, corporations lie to further their profits instead of doing what's best for humanity...
 

Kevin88660

Platinum Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
118%
Feb 8, 2019
3,456
4,078
Singapore
I think the bigger question is when it's not so cut and dry.

Monsanto could argue they provide "value".

The point here is that "value" is subjective and sometimes, corporations lie to further their profits instead of doing what's best for humanity...
Yes business owners and corporation could lie and do lie.

But teachers lie, your family members lie, politicians lie, your friends lie, your pastor lies…

I trust much more in a person or entity who says openly they are doing something for money or for their own good, than for the “greater good”.

The whole premise of non-business people not selfishly acting in their own interest is entirely a fiction.

I would say the average business person is far more ethical than the average non-business person.

An employee can afford to be an a**hole and just do a mediocre job and wait for pay day. A business owner has to deal with customers, suppliers and employee on a regular basis that he or she cannot afford to be an inconsiderate a**hole.

There is this advice that “never do business with your best friends because it might ruin your friendship”. Friendship are easy to keep when there is no money at stake. Things get ugly when money is at stake, and most people have never put that to a test.

On the other hands business people have taken years to train and learn the skills, temperament, and ethic involved in dealing with actual money and profits with other people.
 
Last edited:

Disciple96

Bronze Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
133%
Mar 5, 2016
147
196
USA
Yes business owners and corporation could lie and do lie.

But teachers lie, your family members lie, politicians lie, your friends lie, your pastor lies…

I trust much more in a person or entity who says openly they are doing something for money or for their own good, than for the “greater good”.

The whole premise of non-business people not selfishly acting in their own interest is entirely a fiction.

I would say the average business person is far more ethical than the average non-business person.

An employee can afford to be an a**hole and just do a mediocre job and wait for pay day. A business owner has to deal with customers, suppliers and employee on a regular basis that he or she cannot afford to be an inconsiderate a**hole.

There is this advice that “never do business with your best friends because it might ruin your friendship”. Friendship are easy to keep when there is no money at stake. Things get ugly when money is at stake, and most people have never put that to a test.

On the other hands business people have taken years to train and learn the skills, temperament, and ethic involved in dealing with actual money and profits with other people.
I would argue that what you're saying is a bit different than what I'm talking about.

The actions of those with power over a multinational corporation have a far greater impact due to the scope of their actions than individuals slacking at work, wasting company time or simply providing low value to customers. Time theft from multinational corps or even mom and pops, while unethical, is unsustainable and they'll likely get canned. Even doing poor quality work will get you fired. The actions of these individuals barely registers on the "immorality scale" compared to things big companies do.

Producing dangerous chemicals and polluting the planet with cancerous byproducts is not only usually legal to some degree, but it's subsidized. Nobody is coming after these people because their billion dollar ad campaigns convince them theres nothing going on (i.e. thank you for smoking)

So while "everybody lies" in the words of a TV doctor, what is really important, ethics aside, is what are the effect of these lies and how damaging are they to broader society?

The fact is, nobody competes against these institutions, but if someone were to try it, ethically, it would be impossible.

This is because those who came before within a particular vertical have implemented "glass ceilings" in their wake. Good luck producing 1/10 of what Monsanto can due to their ethically grey pesticides, GMOs, marketing department, and other business practices like intellectual property law abuse.

The only thing that can defeat these unethical institutions is ethical individuals, those who do their best to provide true value to others and who find blue oceans to build in. It is possible to do business ethically, obviously, and many do. But it is the narrow path and will necessarily lock you out of the upper echelons who are far from ethical.

Unfortunately, we're in a time of great degeneration, so it's like trying to get everyone to swim against the tide. It might help a small community, but the ship is sinking and all we can do is build escape rafts from scraps while the people who sank the boat are getting airlifted.

Here's a thought I had: Would it be ethical to sell your ownership of a company, if in doing so you knew your customer base would get less and less value over time, leading to accelerated business failure and the loss of livelihoods for your employees?

I think yes, it is ethical, because you have little control of the outcome and ultimately all humans operate in self-interest anyways.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
Last edited:

WJK

Legendary Contributor
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
256%
Oct 9, 2017
3,115
7,961
Alaska
I would argue that what you're saying is a bit different than what I'm talking about.

The actions of those with power over a multinational corporation have a far greater impact due to the scope of their actions than individuals slacking at work, wasting company time or simply providing low value to customers. Time theft from multinational corps or even mom and pops, while unethical, is unsustainable and they'll likely get canned. Even doing poor quality work will get you fired. The actions of these individuals barely registers on the "immorality scale" compared to things big companies do.

Producing dangerous chemicals and polluting the planet with cancerous byproducts is not only usually legal to some degree, but it's subsidized. Nobody is coming after these people because their billion dollar ad campaigns convince them theres nothing going on (i.e. thank you for smoking)

So while "everybody lies" in the words of a TV doctor, what is really important, ethics aside, is what are the effect of these lies and how damaging are they to broader society?

The fact is, nobody competes against these institutions, but if someone were to try it, ethically, it would be impossible.

This is because those who came before within a particular vertical have implemented "glass ceilings" in their wake. Good luck producing 1/10 of what Monsanto can due to their ethically grey pesticides, GMOs, marketing department, and other business practices like intellectual property law abuse.

The only thing that can defeat these unethical institutions is ethical individuals, those who do their best to provide true value to others and who find blue oceans to build in. It is possible to do business ethically, obviously, and many do. But it is the narrow path and will necessarily lock you out of the upper echelons who are far from ethical.

Unfortunately, we're in a time of great degeneration, so it's like trying to get everyone to swim against the tide. It might help a small community, but the ship is sinking and all we can do is build escape rafts from scraps while the people who sank the boat are getting airlifted.

Here's a thought I had: Would it be ethical to sell your ownership of a company, if in doing so you knew your customer base would get less and less value over time, leading to accelerated business failure and the loss of livelihoods for your employees?

I think yes, it is ethical, because you have little control of the outcome and ultimately all humans operate in self-interest anyways.
This is all too dark for me.
 

easy850

New Contributor
Read Fastlane!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
100%
Aug 8, 2021
16
16
Anything can be considered immoral.

Take vegitarians, people say it's immoral to eat animals but plants do nothing bad to us, they even create the oxygen we need to breathe.

And how do we repay them? Inbreeding them, forcing them to grow in rows, then ripping them out of the ground and consuming them by the millions of pounds every year.

I'm kidding of course but if you look at anything upside down, inside out you can see how immoral or moral it is.

The more time you spend contemplating the morality of what you're doing, the less time you spend actually doing things that move the needle.

I go by my gut, if I have a bad feeling about doing something, no amount of rationalization will make it OK in my eyes.
 

Iammelissamoore

Silver Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
239%
Sep 23, 2014
393
938
Trinidad and Tobago
Y'all need to listen to the podcast episodes by @Kak regarding this.

It does not pay to be a crook. It simply doesn't. It might appear to work for a little while, but it never works in the end.

Look at Bernie Madoff - he was not a real businessman. He was a scammer. He is now in prison. Or Epstein - we know how that went.

No, you will make the most money by providing real value, not ripping people off with perceived value that does not live up to expectations.

That's bad for your business.


Also, it depends on what your morals are. If you believe that having money is evil, you better quit right now because you're never going to make it. That's not a good moral. However, if you believe in treating people fairly and dealing honestly, that will actually help you.
THIS RIGHT HERE!

When I read the title of the post, I found it interesting from the get-go.

Reading further with additional comments, I came to a similar point, while Coca-Cola and other rip-off companies may build billions, we're not always aware of the many lawsuits they pay - or settle, which cuts into their profits. The Wall Street hustles seem successful because of the constant lies they sell on morning news money segments - THAT is what keeps their businesses flowing, NOT the fact that they rip people off. ...and the global masses trust in the almighty morning news, therefore, these companies may seemingly thrive on their lies.

This post pushes further the importance of value. Not that I want to be a broken record, but when I first read about the importance of creating value from The Millionaire Fastlane, it took on an entirely new meaning for me. Many companies that did not necessarily take a nose-dive throughout this pandemic are offering real, tangible value.

Sadly there are far more scams now due to people's desperation from the disruption of economies, but if I have learnt nothing else, and trust that I am learning lots, companies that offer morals and value are thriving, even if the journey is a bit longwinded, but their success is solid and long-term.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
Last edited:

Kevin88660

Platinum Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
118%
Feb 8, 2019
3,456
4,078
Singapore
I would argue that what you're saying is a bit different than what I'm talking about.

The actions of those with power over a multinational corporation have a far greater impact due to the scope of their actions than individuals slacking at work, wasting company time or simply providing low value to customers. Time theft from multinational corps or even mom and pops, while unethical, is unsustainable and they'll likely get canned. Even doing poor quality work will get you fired. The actions of these individuals barely registers on the "immorality scale" compared to things big companies do.

Producing dangerous chemicals and polluting the planet with cancerous byproducts is not only usually legal to some degree, but it's subsidized. Nobody is coming after these people because their billion dollar ad campaigns convince them theres nothing going on (i.e. thank you for smoking)

So while "everybody lies" in the words of a TV doctor, what is really important, ethics aside, is what are the effect of these lies and how damaging are they to broader society?

The fact is, nobody competes against these institutions, but if someone were to try it, ethically, it would be impossible.

This is because those who came before within a particular vertical have implemented "glass ceilings" in their wake. Good luck producing 1/10 of what Monsanto can due to their ethically grey pesticides, GMOs, marketing department, and other business practices like intellectual property law abuse.

The only thing that can defeat these unethical institutions is ethical individuals, those who do their best to provide true value to others and who find blue oceans to build in. It is possible to do business ethically, obviously, and many do. But it is the narrow path and will necessarily lock you out of the upper echelons who are far from ethical.

Unfortunately, we're in a time of great degeneration, so it's like trying to get everyone to swim against the tide. It might help a small community, but the ship is sinking and all we can do is build escape rafts from scraps while the people who sank the boat are getting airlifted.

Here's a thought I had: Would it be ethical to sell your ownership of a company, if in doing so you knew your customer base would get less and less value over time, leading to accelerated business failure and the loss of livelihoods for your employees?

I think yes, it is ethical, because you have little control of the outcome and ultimately all humans operate in self-interest anyways.
I just think the examples you cite are not strong enough to support your main thesis, that the more unethical you are, the richer you get in business.

Even big business are not big from day one. They didn’t growing their way by screwing everyone else.

On average business people are more ethical than non-business people. And I would extend the argument by saying big business are on average more ethical than small business. Just like rich people on average are more ethical than poor people.

Morality requires materials. No point convincing someone to follow the ethical codes of life when he cannot fill his stomach. You are more likely to find small business breaking rules on tax, intellectual property theft or employee abuse than big corporations who have the material abundance to set all things in order. Small business are often on the verge of closing down and hunting for the next sales.

Big business have resources to lobby for their cause. They might win. They might lose. Do not forget they they have influence because so many of the jobs and income depends on them. If you shut down a big business, all the small contractors serving them and the jobs created by these countless number of small contractors all will vanish. It is not hard to figure out that you have to bring value on the table first before the government or others could possibly keep one eye closed on your misdeeds.
 
Last edited:

Disciple96

Bronze Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
133%
Mar 5, 2016
147
196
USA
I just think the examples you cite are not strong enough to support your main thesis, that the more unethical you are, the richer you get in business.

Even big business are not big from day one. They didn’t growing their way by screwing everyone else.

On average business people are more ethical than non-business people. And I would extend the argument by saying big business are on average more ethical than small business. Just like rich people on average are more ethical than poor people.

Morality requires materials. No point convincing someone to follow the ethical codes of life when he cannot fill his stomach. You are more likely to find small business breaking rules on tax, intellectual property theft or employee abuse than big corporations who have the material abundance to set all things in order. Small business are often on the verge of closing down and hunting for the next sales.

Big business have resources to lobby for their cause. They might win. They might lose. Do not forget they they have influence because so many of the jobs and income depends on them. If you shut down a big business, all the small contractors serving them and the jobs created by these countless number of small contractors all will vanish. It is not hard to figure out that you have to bring value on the table first before the government or others could possibly keep one eye closed on your misdeeds.

I think thats where the miscommunication lies. My main thesis isnt that you become more successful the less ethical you are, rather that you will preclude yourself from certain profitable practices necessarily because you are ethical.

Especially when competing against someone less ethical than you, assuming there are no other repercussions, it is a battle to see who is more underhanded and if you let "ethics" get in the way of battle you will lose. Doubly true if these unethical business practices aren't *illegal* or are at least legally grey business practices. Unregulated industries come to mind, Ethereum or Solana for instance.

While I agree with you that ethically grey practices are more commonplace among those with more to lose, e.g. mom n pops and individuals, that is exactly why I say it is the immoral deeds that will seperate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, in the big leagues. One does not ethically disrupt Monsanto *enough to become the new monsanto*.

If you are truly ethical, the glass ceilings these monoliths leave in their wake prevent an ethical person from following too closely behind, or any person for that matter, but especially highly ethical ones.

Now, none of this is to say big business is inherently bad or that if you want to be rich you need to be unethical. Not at all. Just that being a highly ethical person in the big business world is about as difficult as being a highly ethical person in the political world. Not impossible. But you won't be doing your career any favors, if at least you keep your soul.
 
Last edited:

Antifragile

Progress not perfection
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
453%
Mar 15, 2018
3,708
16,813
@Disciple96

You are assuming that to get to the top you must be willing to cross lines and do unethical things. That's because "if I don't do it, someone else will and I will lose on opportunity to make $$".

20 years ago I thought this way.

I don't anymore. Why? Because the information asymmetry is substantially gone. It used to be that going to a department store made I could rely on quality for the goods. The "purchasing manager" would choose for me and tell tell me that these are the best (value, quality, luxury etc.). Ads in the past could claim things about smoking and get away with it. How is it different today? You go on Amazon and if product has 1 Star ratings 90% of the time, you won't touch it no matter the price. Cheating is only done when:
a) You believe you can get away with it, and
b) You feel justified (like others will do if I don't)

Acting unethically can hurt more than help with growing your business.

Also, @Kevin88660 said it. It's hard to worry about ethics when you are broke. Extreme example, if your kids are hungry, would you steal to feed them? I would. F*ck it, I'll do whatever it takes to provide for my family. Ethics only come when I can afford to have ethics. This is why in dirt poor countries corruption is rampant. It's not that somehow people are "worse versions of humans" than say citizens of the USA or Switzerland. It's that when your back is up against the wall, you tend to do thing you wouldn't otherwise consider. Ethics is a luxury.

Same extends to the business. Big corps compete on providing a value skew. If they are based in dirt poor countries, expect them to be less ethical. They'll get away with it too - by bribing officials etc. But multinationals from the USA are likely to be far better corporate citizens (not perfect!) but better. Not because they are run by "better humans" but because it would hurt their business if it was discovered they did something bad. Social media would spread it like wild fire, people would react on emotion etc.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Disciple96

Bronze Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
133%
Mar 5, 2016
147
196
USA
@Disciple96

You are assuming that to get to the top you must be willing to cross lines and do unethical things. That's because "if I don't do it, someone else will and I will lose on opportunity to make $$".

20 years ago I thought this way.

I don't anymore. Why? Because the information asymmetry is substantially gone. It used to be that going to a department store made I could rely on quality for the goods. The "purchasing manager" would choose for me and tell tell me that these are the best (value, quality, luxury etc.). Ads in the past could claim things about smoking and get away with it. How is it different today? You go on Amazon and if product has 1 Star ratings 90% of the time, you won't touch it no matter the price. Cheating is only done when:
a) You believe you can get away with it, and
b) You feel justified (like others will do if I don't)

Acting unethically can hurt more than help with growing your business.

Also, @Kevin88660 said it. It's hard to worry about ethics when you are broke. Extreme example, if your kids are hungry, would you steal to feed them? I would. f*ck it, I'll do whatever it takes to provide for my family. Ethics only come when I can afford to have ethics. This is why in dirt poor countries corruption is rampant. It's not that somehow people are "worse versions of humans" than say citizens of the USA or Switzerland. It's that when your back is up against the wall, you tend to do thing you wouldn't otherwise consider. Ethics is a luxury.

Same extends to the business. Big corps compete on providing a value skew. If they are based in dirt poor countries, expect them to be less ethical. They'll get away with it too - by bribing officials etc. But multinationals from the USA are likely to be far better corporate citizens (not perfect!) but better. Not because they are run by "better humans" but because it would hurt their business if it was discovered they did something bad. Social media would spread it like wild fire, people would react on emotion etc.
Except in the instance of a company providing something which fits the status quo. Things in the status quo are not perceived negatively, although they are -- until they are.

My ultimate point here might be more that, highly influential companies (which, as you and Kevin point out, provide extreme value) often use their influence to benefit the quarterly returns at the expense of long-term, "ethical", development.

They're also capable of leveraging a billion dollar PR department to slide the scale of what "ethical" even means to moral relativists so they can keep profiting from unethical behavior.

Only the most egregious of these examples seem to end up in disaster, like outright fraud in the example of Bernie Madoff, or deceptive marketing practices from Purdue Pharma, or maybe the banks in the 08 collapse.

As long as you aren't doing anything illegal, your PR department should be able to sway or at least stall the tide of negative public perception. That's where the unethical side really comes in.

It's great that, in a free market, an entrepreneur can disrupt these companies by offering higher value products.

Except it's not really a free market when the biggest companies lobby governments to implement one-sided regulations that favor them. Tax codes, golden parachutes, basically any regulatory body is up for sale, FDA, FCC, FAA, etc.. hell even the CDC if you catch my drift.

I am of no opinion that big business = bad, but unfortunately some of the most influential big business of our time are very corrupt and self-serving at the expense of the rest of the public, and our representatives and appointed officials just collect their checks and look the other way until public outcry forces them to pay attention.

To exist in that sphere almost necessitates playing by their rules, although nothing is written.

If you're not using all the same lobbying tactics and PR campaigns to skirt accountability in the public eye for your cutthroat business practices, you're at a disadvantage. And you can't tell me that being cutthroat isn't a prerequisite for that caliber of success.

I should add this seems to be most prevalent in the biggest publicly traded companies. Privately owned companies are under no such pressure to "wring the towel" at any cost for quarterly returns.

A noble spirited entrepreneur can disrupt even the biggest industries. What's more of a threat, to that entrepreneur, is not anything externally motivating you to betray your moral compass, but rather "selling your soul" yourself along the way, in other words, rationalizing away poor ethical decisions and having to live with that. See:

I might have come across really pessimistic but, I tend to focus on global elite power structures and so I sound really jaded on open ended macro topics lol
 
Last edited:

Antifragile

Progress not perfection
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
453%
Mar 15, 2018
3,708
16,813
@Disciple96

I enjoy this debate with you. Thought provoking!

There may be a conclusion here. Some leaders who take over big companies are unethical and focused on their rewards more than company's rewards. This happens to the CEO/Super Managers. Golden parachutes made me think of this. They are never 100% aligned with the owners. In my business I am one in the same, I own and I lead. My decisions don't benefit me at the expense of some poor shmuck investor (think Enron, great book is The Smartest Guys in the Room). These guys did a bunch of unethical things, they had the power... etc. In short, you have a point, I don't disagree with many of the things you said. It's just that here, many of us are owners of businesses and take this type of conversation personally (internalize to our own behaviour).
 

Kevin88660

Platinum Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
118%
Feb 8, 2019
3,456
4,078
Singapore
I think thats where the miscommunication lies. My main thesis isnt that you become more successful the less ethical you are, rather that you will preclude yourself from certain profitable practices necessarily because you are ethical.

Especially when competing against someone less ethical than you, assuming there are no other repercussions, it is a battle to see who is more underhanded and if you let "ethics" get in the way of battle you will lose. Doubly true if these unethical business practices aren't *illegal* or are at least legally grey business practices. Unregulated industries come to mind, Ethereum or Solana for instance.

While I agree with you that ethically grey practices are more commonplace among those with more to lose, e.g. mom n pops and individuals, that is exactly why I say it is the immoral deeds that will seperate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, in the big leagues. One does not ethically disrupt Monsanto *enough to become the new monsanto*.

If you are truly ethical, the glass ceilings these monoliths leave in their wake prevent an ethical person from following too closely behind, or any person for that matter, but especially highly ethical ones.

Now, none of this is to say big business is inherently bad or that if you want to be rich you need to be unethical. Not at all. Just that being a highly ethical person in the big business world is about as difficult as being a highly ethical person in the political world. Not impossible. But you won't be doing your career any favors, if at least you keep your soul.
It depends on what your moral compass is.

In term of moral priority, it is most important for a business to treat their customers and employee well.

Other things while important, are secondary in my opinion.

Your customers pay you. Your employee fight for your. Everyone else is a passerby.

It seems that we are primarily concerned with "cheating your customer" while you are more focused on corporate social responsibility.

After 2008 renumeration for top CEO are moving towards stock option. I think that has done the work to mitigate the short term quarterly thinking.

Big business are trying to lobby and argue for a narrative that is more favorable to their survival and growth. There is constant denial from google and facebook about them being monopolies, as they fear being smacked with anti-competitive regulations and fines. America did break up Standard oil before. No one is exempted. Everything is possible.

I am not too concerned about big business being too powerful. I think it is exaggerated that big business are some sort of threat to freedom and actors of immorality. Most powerful entities int his world are still governments that spy, lie and kill. And you do not have an option even if you do not like it (unless you migrate). An individual (even rich and powerful by average standard) is still powerless when you came at the opposing end against the state machinery.

Uncle Sam basically used full force pressure and annihilated the entire business of the banking industry of Switzerland. Banking secrecy around the world is coming to an end soon. And the U.S. administration is pushing for a global minimum tax rate. I see all these insane and invasive measures and pressure as a bigger threat towards business freedom.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
Last edited:

Speed112

Silver Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
284%
Dec 5, 2013
190
540
29
Over here, over there.
Morality, amorality, or immorality are not necessarily predictors of success.

And "morals" are subjective. You've got people on either side and there's a market for any combination of them.

As an entrepreneur, your job isn't to make moral judgments or establish normative guidelines. Your job is to solve problems and provide value to your market.

A hitman who is trying to cater to unscrupulous individuals that want to murder others would probably have a really really bad time selling and fulfilling their service if their morality prevented them from killing.

At the same time, a veterinarian who is cold and hurts the animals they're treating because they don't care would probably alienate a lot of their customer base.

You can argue that an amoral person with no principles would be able to mold themselves to his market's morals and perfectly cater to them. Maybe. That may give them an advantage.

But sticking to your own morality and principles is never a disadvantage in my opinion. As long as there is a market large enough that you can connect with which shares that morality. It's value skew. Your Values (V) are value skew that you can employ to find your ideal audience and service them better than anyone else.

Having strong morals and being very clear on what they are, both in your mind, but also in your communications and brand positioning is, in my opinion, an advantage. And it's something a very very small minority of people have.

Most people are super wishywashy and unclear about what they believe and how that affects their actions. They carry many contradictions and superficial views, so expressing them outward or relating them to their business is very difficult if not impossible.

So morality doesn't help you do your job as an entrepreneur, but it can help you identify and connect with those that you can do the best job for.
 

Shiva2392

New Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
63%
Dec 27, 2021
8
5
It sounds to me as if you view some people as too stupid to have any moral responsibility. As if transactions often lack a moral agent as buyer or seller. As if average people are animals or inanimate objects?
It's not that some people assume others are stupid to have or take moral responsibility but because even 'morality' is a learned behaviour. Average people are animals and we need each other to guide each other, as everyone is gullible. Just saying , reality is interdependent.
 

Post New Topic

Please SEARCH before posting.
Please select the BEST category.

Post new topic

Guest post submissions offered HERE.

Latest Posts

New Topics

Fastlane Insiders

View the forum AD FREE.
Private, unindexed content
Detailed process/execution threads
Ideas needing execution, more!

Join Fastlane Insiders.

Top