“Greed is good”, so states the fictitious character of the 1980s hit “Wall Street”. From a technical standpoint, it’s difficult to argue the stance. The philosophy and survival of human greed is historically evident in a Darwinian theory: survival of the fittest – which generally is an application to the strongest or craftier members of any given species. This, of course, includes homo sapiens – humans. The greedy prosper. In a medieval era, those riddled with greed and self-intentions were often wealthy members of society in comparison to more compassionate individuals attempting to be selfless. A saint was not a baron, and a baron was not a saint. As the assumption goes: the nice guy finishes last.

This is a very clear-cut understanding of practicality. Very few people are willing to do something without compensation, and those who are generally find dissatisfaction in their professional work. Speaking from experience, I’ve indulged in numerous free-projects as an illustrator and cartoonist for a good friend, who not once offered me pay, but accepted my earnest charity for sake of knowing I wanted to draw and love partnerships. Even so, when push comes to shove, I would brush off the projects or set them on a back-burner, resulting in numerous confrontations about this or that – but the case was that I was doing it for fun, not personal gain; I was receiving nothing but a learning experience out of the matter, and while still good friends with my on-off partner, we’ve come to an agreement that work is not possible without incentive, without earning – and artistic passion is not enough incentive to work on a potentially fifteen volume graphic novel series while trying to also pursue occupational endeavors to survive in a world of “have a paycheck or no bread”. In that respect, I have to agree with the philosophy of greed is good. I’d be lying through my teeth like a hypocrite otherwise considering I will do nothing for anyone without compensation or exchange – although, compared to most artists accepting commissions, I’m obscenely cheap (most commissions, even sketches, go for about $15-$25 when privately exchanged; I sell across the board for $5. Damn cheap! But I also don’t have a solid portfolio). Therein lies the reasoning: who in their right mind would genuinely offer up lengthy or complicated services for no additional fee or exchange? Even odd-workers or road-travelers accept meals for their services. The only exception I find within this is an exchange between friends for sake of honest good-will.
Again. Money breeds incentive, incentive breeds quality. Even passionate, creative people are not cheap; they’re demanding, difficult, almost prudish people who want their say and want to be treated professionally for their craft. Anyone who tells an artist ‘I’m not paying you to draw’ is going to get a swift pop to the face. Because money breeds incentive, incentive breeds quality, and why would anyone do commercial work without compensation? It’s not the same as doing what you want to do for fun.

This brings me to an interesting point from Essentials of Business Law: Contracts for labor and materials. “A contract for labor and materials, even though it involves $500 or more, need not always be in writing to be enforceable … The UCC provides that ‘if the goods are to be specially manufactured for the buyer and are not suitable for sale to others’ the requirement of a written contract does not necessarily apply. The contract will not be binding if the buyer repudiates (cancels) the oral contract and the seller receives notice before they begin manufacturing the goods. If, however, the seller has begun manufacture or made a commitment, the cancellation is not effective (Essentials of Business Law 6th ed., Liuzzo & Bonnice, pg. 216)."

The reason I bring this up is because greed in and of itself, in this case, as applied to an occupational world, is absolutely appropriate. Say I was working on the graphic novel project with my partner, and we had an agreement that I would actually be paid (this being if we weren’t incredibly close friends to the point of which I do 80% of his illustration work for free if he asks?). If I had gotten through the first three volumes, and the agreement was that I would be paid something like $500 per book, if he canceled on me after three books, I would have some protection and my time, efforts, resources, and supplies would not have been wasted on a dupe project. To me, that’s acceptable greed – whole-heartedly. We had an arrangement, I need my bread – and just because someone had a second-thought after a project began does not excuse the fact that I need my money to survive. Point in case: it’s greedy to say “I need the pay for what I’ve done” – but is it wrong? No. It’s not wrong to pursue it. That example would a $1500 deal, and, time-wise, it would be up to nine months of work, possibly less, possibly more, depending on the length of the book. Damn right that’s worth pursuing – and, as I mark, I find the UCC’s exception to contracts acceptable. I wouldn’t be furious or demanding pay if I hadn’t even started something yet, but it’s a different peddle of fish if I have already invested my work and time into a project when I could have been doing something else.

Similarly, disclaimers can be construed as greedy. “A denial or repudiation in an express warranty is known as a disclaimer and serves to limit the effectiveness of a warranty (Essentials of Business Law 6th ed., Liuzzo & Bonnice, pg. 234). ” Limiting the warranty protects the company from having to pay and respond to every crackpot occurrence or accident that leads to the destruction of their product. Like, say, you’re selling computers and the warranty stipulates that it covers physical damages to the computer for up to a year. Adding in a disclaimer ‘warranty does not cover damages exceeding $200’ or something is greedy – as it’s designed to limit the services that were designed as a good-will gesture between a buyer, seller, or buyer and manufacturer. However, from a business perspective, I would put that in as a disclaimer too. Why? Because I know how many major accidents can happen to electronics. I knew someone who left their laptop on top of their car and drove off. It fell off, obviously, and was smashed against the ground. Their warranty covered this – which was good, but their stupidity was left at the expensive of the company who provided the warranty. Love my friends to tears, but, c’mon, they completely destroyed it. Companies that offer full warranties like that are saints, but I wouldn’t hold it against a company if they added disclaimers to protect themselves from having to be responsible for the irresponsibility of a customer.

In short: yes, greed is good. But I will state that so is good-will and relationship building. Money is incentive, but it isn’t everything. You can’t run a company on money alone.