• 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    50 minutes ago

    I say neither. Plenty of decent people find ways to make good money without selling themselves to the devil. Personal injury lawyers are a great example, they are real-life Robin Hoods.

    • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      44 minutes ago

      I hope you realize personal injury lawyers work for rich people too. Those settlements drive up insurance costs for everybody. I think that’s a pretty bad example of decent people making money.

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 minutes ago

        Most of the ones who make money at it work for themselves, solo or with partners.

        You’d be driving an exploding car and wearing a shirt made of asbestos if it weren’t for personal injury lawyers. You’re welcome.

  • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 hours ago

    A lot of people have a limit where the effort of getting more money isn’t worth it. People without that limit keep trying to acquire money and power.

  • Drusas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    18 hours ago

    The more money I get, the more I want to give it away, so I’m going to guess the latter.

  • shani66@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    19 hours ago

    A consequence free environment (boatloads of money) simply let’s people be who they are. Unfortunately bad people come into money more often.

  • xep@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Often socio-economic structures also incentivize different behaviour for different amounts of wealth, so very often it’s not just money and the person but all of society as well.

    • Tedesche@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      I think this is it, actually. Having a lot of money can lead to spending it on frivolous things, but I don’t think that’s what we mean by corruption. It’s when you have so much money that you can use that money to influence people in power that it gets bad. Suddenly, when getting your way is merely a question of bribery and you have plenty of means to do it, people start thinking they have a right to pull the strings in the way they see fit.

      • theparadox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        You don’t even need bribery. You can just throw money at something and make things happen.

        If you think something is true, you can pay the world to prioritize things as if it were true.

        If you think vaccines cause autism and you are rich, you can create massive “education” campaigns and the like to convince people its true. You can buy ads telling people its true. You can amass an enormous following of people who believe you and change policy without bribery.

      • roofuskit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yeah when people refer to money as power they’re not talking about the d-bag with the McMansion and a cybertruck. They’re talking about a level of wealth few people understand.

  • Rottcodd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Both, I’d say.

    Money doesn’t create corruption out of thin air - anyone who’s corrupted by it already had to have the potential. But money does undoubtedly lead people who otherwise would have resisted their baser nature to indulge it instead.

    And it very definitely provides the means for people who are already psychologically and/or morally inclined to corruption, and so is very attractive to them.

    • Acamon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I’d agree with that. If you use you’re vast wealth to do awful things then you’re an awful person. But I’ve defintely had moments when a moment of rage or lust or other bad intention has bubbled up inside, and I’ve wanted to buy a business just to fire the rude person I’ve argued with, or hire a team of sex workers just to fulfill some weird fantasy. But as a poor normal person those thoughts appear and pass because i can’t do anything about them. I’d hope that if I was a billionaire, I’d still take a moment and realise the gap between id urge and superego approved action, but who knows?

  • 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I think it’s enough of a mix of both to where it doesn’t really matter at the end which was the cause and which was the effect. I feel similarly about the vague concept of power, to which money is a manifestation of.

  • Kintarian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    That’s kind of like, “What came first, the chicken or the egg?” It seems to me that when you give a regular person a bunch of money, like winning the lottery, they tend to go kind of nuts with it. So in that way, it seems that money is corrupting them. If you have some kind of ultra-rich person who loves money and power, then they’re already corrupt because of power and money.