In my economics class I tested my students' ability to not just regurgitate what I told them, but see if they can take what I taught them and start drawing logical economic conclusions. To do this I asked one rather difficult question:
Why are stock prices going up faster than earnings?
It is a difficult question, but of the many guesses I get, the most pluralistic one is:
I have to temper my immediate ire and remind myself of the innocence of that answer. Nearly nobody has adequate education in economics, and nearly everybody has misinformation and propaganda fed to them by state schools.
However, the prevalence of that answer only indicates just how widespread leftist indoctrination has become and it's time to explain greed as a means to undo this political brainwashing.
Understand there is no such thing as greed. There is only theft.
In other words the only REAL form of greed is when somebody steals something that is not theirs. That act - stealing - is the only behavior that can truly be considered greed.
What the left has managed to do is change the meaning of the word "greed" to mean "not sharing enough of your wealth, income, profits, resources or time with other people." The problem is "well, how much is enough so that the person is no longer considered 'greedy'?"
This puts us on a slippery slope, and was done so quite intentionally by the left. Because since there is no objective standard as to what is "enough" this leaves it up to the interpretation of the person accusing somebody of being greedy. And no doubt, almost always this accuser is
and the answer to "how much is enough" is always
The problem is this cowardly tactic by the left does not adhere to reality in two ways:
Morally and mathematically.
Morally, nobody has to share jack with anybody else. The reason is simple - that person gave up part of their precious and finite life to get what wealth and income they have. Ergo, when you are asking somebody to "share" you are literally saying, "become my slave for part of your life so that you may work up the money and wealth to give to me."
Doesn't matter if that person earned a trillion dollars.
Doesn't matter if that person uses diamond spoons.
Doesn't matter if that person has 30 mansions.
It accusing somebody of being greedy, and thereby implying they should share, you are in PLAIN ENGLISH telling them to be your slave, albeit for a limited time.
The second way the accusation of greedy doesn't work (from a leftist standpoint) is the "how much is enough" component. Not one leftist, NOT ONE can answer the simple question:
"How much is enough?"
When it comes to the public schools, there is never enough money.
When it comes to welfare, the poor, and the elderly, there is never enough.
When it comes to the children or global warmer, there is never enough.
The reason why is that leftists are by their nature lazy and never sit down to calculate how much money would be necessary to finance their demands. They are emotionally driven, parasitically even, to constantly demand more and more and more and more and more (matter of fact I intend on doing a little research project where I am going to contact various political parties and ask them what their economic plan is, namely what their goals are and what are their financial plans to attain said goals - I already know NONE of them, Republicans included, will have said plans). It doesn't occur to them that there may be limited funds, and even though we're already spending around 40% GDP, I do not doubt for a second that if asked they would demand 2.5x's or more than what is currently being spent.
The larger point is that the accusation of "greed" is the perfect weapon for leftists because it provides a reason to take other people's money and allows them to take as much as they can as there is no objective standard or adherence to reality governing what is "enough." And so as long as somebody just "thinks" said person has too much money (be it a kid whose brother found $40 or an adult whose neighbor makes $400,000) they can make the accusation of "greed" just as they "racism" on equally flimsy and intellectually dishonest grounds.
The key is to ignore the accusation knowing deep down inside you are neither a thief nor a racist.