Rhetorical Analysis: Greed Is Good

Words: 723
Pages: 3

The “Greed is Good” speech refers to the corrupt nature of executives. Gekko complains about the Board being overpaid and doing an insufficient job. He advises the shareholders in the audience to protect their interests since the executives have been doing such a bad job. However, Gekko closes his speech by pointing out that “greed is good” because it is how we, as a society, have evolved. The “Friedman” video focuses on how every country runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. Dr. Friedman talks about how innovations and technological development can all be attributed to self-interest. Greed fuels capitalist societies, while virtue is unrewarded. “Is Greed Good?” talks about whether or not greed is beneficial. The two guests are of different political parties and argue on their take of whether or not this is true. Stossel argues that businessmen that make more money actually make us all richer, similar to when Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller came to the United States poor and eventually became rich, making us all richer. The video goes on to argue who did more for …show more content…
It made sense that greed fueled economies and businesses, but I do not think the “Greed is Good” video thoroughly provided an explanation as to why greed is, in fact, good. It is hard to disagree with anything Dr. Friedman says as he makes such valid points in the second video. I loved that he pointed out how Einstein and other inventors created new technology based on their own self interest; they wanted to be the one to create it. The Stossel video provided lots of different takes on this concept that I thought was interesting to hear about. I have to side with Stossel in that I do think greed is beneficial because it fuels the progression of society. I think there are lots of greedy people in this world, but I do not think we could have come this far without doing things for